SSPD Committee Meeting

SUB-COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES OF THE STANDING COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT AND THE STATUS OF PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES

SOUS-COMITÉ SUR LA CONDITION DES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES DU COMITÉ PERMANENT DES RESSOURCES HUMAINES ET DE LA CONDITION DES PERSONNES HANDICAPÉES

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Thursday, March 11, 1999

• 1538

[English]

The Chair (Ms. Carolyn Bennett (St. Paul's, Lib.)): I call the meeting to order.

The tiny bit of housekeeping to begin with is to announce that ministers Manley and Collenette will be with us next week, so we can prepare our thoughts.

Mr. Andy Scott (Fredericton, Lib.): Is it Thursday?

The Chair: Yes, at 3.30 p.m. There's still a chance for Minister Massé, I think.

Today we're pleased to welcome, from the Canadian Alliance for Animal-Assisted Services, Joanne Moss, president and founder, along with John Hatton, Lyn Taylor, and Patricia Clark Curry.

I've lost the important witness, Sox. I was trying to call him “Boots”. This would be a bad thing.

Voices: Oh, oh.

The Chair: Boots has another notoriety, I think.

Joanne.

Ms. Joanne Moss (President and Founder, Canadian Alliance for Animal-Assisted Services): First of all, I'd like to thank the chair and the committee members for the invitation to be here today.

I would like to draw your attention to the handouts I had prepared for all of you. I would encourage you to follow along. I hope they'll be informative and helpful.

• 1540

I've called this presentation, “Value Added! Service Animals An Alternative Remedial Aid to Achieve Autonomy”.

First of all, who is the alliance? The Canadian Alliance for Animal-Assisted Services endeavours to advance the current system of providing Canadians with alternative animal-assisted services to promote abilities, while improving health, quality of life, well-being and autonomy.

The alliance was federally incorporated as a non-profit organization in February of 1998. This national voluntary health organization's web site can be located on Industry Canada's web site, better know as the Canadian Wellness Network.

Our direction is to become a registered ISO quality management service provider. The benefits to that are third-party ongoing evaluation, credibility, and accountability.

I now would like to draw your attention to our goals. We're hoping that we'll be able to come up with the resources to support these goals. We're working on that as we speak. We're putting together our business plan and so forth.

To start with, we'd like to support the advancement and field formation of ethical animal-assisted services to benefit the health of Canadians; to unite stakeholders to build provincial, national, and, where appropriate, international bridges, and consensus at each stage of development; to create awareness and new opportunities through education, while enhancing credibility; to help eliminate fragmentation of services; to encourage a consistent level of quality and service and safety; to promote evidence-based decision-making to establish a realistic framework and approach toward development and health promotion; to support service providers by making the best possible use of resources, as they work to provide maximum consumer benefits; to expand human resources to generate job creation; to acknowledge the valuable contribution and expertise of volunteers; to support animal safety; and to promote the removal of barriers in accessing services and the utilization of service animals in everyday living.

The purpose of presenting this brief is to introduce the alliance; to identify animal-assisted services; to highlight the vast array of legislation, regulations and bylaws affecting the use of service animals and service-animal teams; and to recognize consumers, other stakeholders and potential partners, and the benefits associated with building partnerships to advance services.

We invite the members of the subcommittee to work with the alliance to help build government and other stakeholder partnerships to help achieve the following proposed action plans and outcomes.

Under the proposed action plan, number one would be to assist the alliance with conducting a study—for example, a HALS survey—on service-animal-related issues. The outcome would be to help identify barriers.

Two would be to support the alliance with building a relevant animal-assisted services database. The outcome would be to create a single entry point.

Three would be to help the alliance secure the necessary resources to conduct a needs assessment in the service-animal sector. The outcome would be to support evidence-based decision-making, help prioritize issues, and develop an appropriate three-year work plan with interested stakeholders.

Four would be to help promote the creation of an educational video presentation to create awareness, understanding, gain support and other resources, and build momentum.

But what are animal-assisted services? They currently encompass guide dogs for the blind, hearing ear dogs, special skills dogs, seizure alert dogs, animal-assisted therapy programs, and therapeutic riding programs.

I would ask you to turn to the next page, which highlights the consumers list. They are listed by special needs. As you can see, a number of Canadians with disabilities do benefit, and could benefit, from these types of services if the services were much more accessible.

I've also taken the liberty of highlighting some of the goals with regard to service animals. These are merely a tip of the iceberg.

Some of the goals include: to provide assistance to persons with mobility, visual, hearing and other special needs; to modify a body function to extend or sustain functional capabilities; to reduce or eliminate attendant care; and to increase or maintain autonomy.

• 1545

Other benefits are to promote a healthy, active lifestyle; promote the human-animal bond, which has a very warming and comforting effect that is very worthwhile; and build confidence.

The first guide dog team was introduced in Canada in 1932. Animal-assisted services have evolved considerably since that time. Value has been added by the contribution of hearing ear dogs, special skills dogs, and seizure alert dogs. Other countries engage in the use of emotional support dogs, capuchin monkeys, and pigs.

Government legislation—regulations and bylaws as well as codes of practice for training service animals—vary from province to province and country to country. As a result, the term “guide animal”, or “animal guide”, is outdated. The term “service animal” is generic, and seems to be the most commonly used term in present times.

Research has indicated that these animals are considered to be another remedial or assistive device utilized to restore or gain autonomy despite the fact that animals are not made of silicon, plastic, or electronics, like their competition.

Identifying a working team—the handler and the animal—can prove to be a challenging endeavour. Currently, there are no consistent guidelines or standards associated with this practice.

Some service animals can be obtained by contacting Canadian training facilities. However, a number of guide dogs are still obtained from facilities outside Canada. Allergies are becoming a more prevalent concern, according to the national allergy association, because more animals are being utilized within public facilities. The Canadian Human Rights Commission is currently working on a relevant case.

None of us are exempt from the aging process or from incurring a disability. Some day this could be our choice of a remedial aid in preserving our autonomy and dignity. We ask that you explore the vast opportunities outlined in this brief for the purpose of building a partnership with the alliance, consumers, and other stakeholders to ensure the removal of barriers.

One candle's light may go unnoticed; however, the light of many candles can expose and overcome the barriers preventing Canadians with disabilities from integrating into the social mainstream. Aerodynamically speaking, the bumblebee is not supposed to be able to fly. Well, try to tell a bumblebee that. The only limitations we experience are those we expose on ourselves and others.

I'd like to draw your attention to the multitude of partnership benefits. Sharing responsibilities encourages Canadians to participate in identifying and assessing their needs and the appropriate service infrastructure to satisfy those needs.

Building partnerships will help to prevent repetition.

Participation will create new opportunities that will demonstrate stakeholder core competencies.

Uniting stakeholders will help to strengthen existing relationships and build new ones.

Providing a single entry point to collaborate, compile, exchange and disseminate information will help to create an efficient clearing house.

The harmonization of practices and terminology will effectively develop a common language.

Stakeholders will be associated with a worthwhile cause while helping to reduce disparity toward the advancement and accessibility of services.

Evidence-based decision-making will promote accountability, identify gaps, and help to ascertain and implement appropriate solutions.

Building human resources throughout these endeavours will help to initiate economic development.

Finally, consulting with stakeholders will yield effective and efficient planning and service delivery.

I put together a very small flowchart that outlines very briefly the government legislation that does affect the use of primarily service animals, not so much the therapeutic-riding and the animal-assisted divisions.

As you can see, on both federal and provincial levels, transportation, health and human rights are definitely affected. In some cases, some provinces do have blind-person rights acts, which also highlight the use of guide animals or dog guides. There is also a B.C. Guide Animal Act.

Somewhere in between, people do fall through the cracks, simply because of the inter-provincial issues. Jurisdiction is a major problem—identifying jurisdictions, basically.

• 1550

Who are the stakeholders and the potential partners? Well, they are a vast array of Canadians who can certainly help with this work.

There's the consumer, somebody like John or Patricia.

Unfortunately, Patricia hasn't been able to make it here today. She was on her way with Para Transpo. She said “Para willing”, she'd be here.

So consumers, as well as family members, like to get involved.

Animal-assisted service providers—in other words, the trainers of these animals, the breeders and all of their affiliates—also like to get involved.

There's government at all levels, including Revenue Canada. Revenue Canada gets involved in the medical expense area of the use of these animals, so any of the costs related to obtaining a service animal or maintaining their health and so forth, such as vet bills, food, grooming and so on, are all tax deductible.

Medical practitioners are quite interested in getting involved as well in looking at referrals. That's why the credibility of this profession... certainly do right by becoming recognized by Canadians, just like any other field. There is trade certification, for example, for physiotherapists and for all other types of non-medical health intervention. That's basically what is being asked of the health community in order to look at referrals, for example.

There are service organizations of persons with disabilities—for example, the MS Society, Alzheimer's, epilepsy and so on and so forth.

There are health care professionals and related services. A lot of community-based services would benefit from being able to access information on service animals. I know a lot of home-care workers, for example, who know clients and work with clients who would probably benefit a great deal from the use of service animals, but they have no idea where to even begin getting information.

The public has a very large interest in this, because they just love to help. They like to look at anything, right from puppy fostering right on up the ladder. There's a lot of interest there.

Then there are standards and trade certification developers. I have spoken at length with the Canadian General Standards Board as well as the Standards Council of Canada and CSA. They're all very interested in this type of work, because they have done a lot of barrier-free standards development—for example, with making buildings and vehicles and so forth more accessible for persons with disabilities. So there is a lot of interest in getting involved in this process.

The nicest part about voluntary standards development is that there is a third party that gets involved, so there is no conflict of interest and there's also an implementation process that can happen. You're not just looking at developing a standard; you're also looking at being able to carry out that standard, which is very vital.

There are veterinarians and associates. Insurance providers are another group I have spoken with. They're very interested, because a lot of insurance companies are interested in providing service to training facilities, for example, or in any of the other areas—therapeutic riding as well as animal-assisted therapy—but they won't touch them because it's not a certified profession. There are too many variables and there are too many unknowns. We're hoping to change that, though, because the work is worthwhile.

I've also highlighted that there are some supportive groups that share our vision. These are groups I consulted with when I finally decided to... I can't say “grab the bull by the horns”, because we're an animal-loving group, and I guess that wouldn't go over very well; let's say when I “took the initiative” to get going on this project and decided to initiate the incorporation of this organization.

These are the groups I've consulted with that recognize the value of building an infrastructure as well as certifying that infrastructure and ongoing accountability and that kind of thing. They are: the Canadian Council on Health Services Accreditation; the Canadian Wellness Network, who have been kind enough to host our web site; Industry Canada; Foreign Affairs; Health Canada; Standards Council of Canada; the Attorney General of British Columbia; the Canadian Human Rights Commission; and The Harness.

The Harness is a newsletter provided by a lady who has a guide dog. She is visually impaired, and she has a wealth of knowledge in the guide animal world. Her newsletters come out only twice a year, but they're well worth subscribing to because they contain such a wealth of knowledge. They are a very active group. In fact, they're also now looking at putting together a guide dog users' association for Canada. We're hoping to encourage them and support them and work together with them as well.

• 1555

Community Communications Group was another group I worked with. They have to do with facilitation projects. Starling Access Services are the ones who are managing our web site. Faith, Hope and Charity Enterprises is my own consulting firm. As well, I worked with the Canadian Institute of Public Health Inspectors, the Canadian Hearing Society, and the Assistive Devices Industry Association of Canada.

To conclude, to create awareness, promote education and take innovative approaches toward achieving quality health for all Canadians with disabilities is to encourage excellence in the present time while preparing for the needs of the future.

Thank you.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Ms. Joanne Moss: I would encourage you or invite you to ask some questions, especially of John. He has come here today and is more than willing to answer questions or even provide a little demonstration for you, if you're interested.

The Chair: Let's do that.

That would be great, John, if you would.

Mr. John Hatton (Member, Canadian Alliance for Animal-Assisted Services): You want me to do a demonstration?

The Chair: That would be excellent.

Mr. John Hatton: Okay.

First of all, I would like to give you some idea of how a hearing ear dog is of value to me. They are trained not to bark, only when somebody knocks on the door from the other side. Then they bark to let you know they are there. Otherwise, they don't bark.

Now, how does she tell me what's going on? Mainly, she will hear a certain sound, and then she will pick up on the sound and come and jump up on me. Then she will go to where the sound is coming from.

She is trained to wake me up in the morning with the alarm clock. When I set the alarm, she will get up, and she will jump on the bottom of the bed. Then she will curl up beside me.

She wakes me up every morning when I set the alarm, but when I don't set the alarm on the week-end, she sleeps in.

If I forget to set the alarm, she sleeps in, and therefore, I'm late for work.

I've woken her up a few times, because I have a hard time remembering to shut off the alarm for something else. I live alone, and this is why I have her.

She is also trained to tell me, when I'm cooking, when the oven is finished. The alarm will go on the oven. She will come and jump on me and then she will go and jump up beside the kitchen counter.

If somebody knocks at the door, she will jump on me, and then she will go to the door. She's trained to obey several different sounds. She's also trained for the smoke alarm and the fire bell. When I'm sleeping at night, she will jump on the bed if the fire bell goes off. She's also trained to pick up any disturbing noises that are unusual.

For example, I live near a car dealership, and at night they deliver cars with a big tractor-trailer. She knows the sound of the engines of certain trucks. With other trucks, she doesn't recognize the different sounds, and then she will wake me up at night.

When she wakes me up, I have to check all my windows, because before I had her, I had been broken into three times. That is one of the main reasons I got this dog.

I've had her now for about seven years. I've never had a problem with her in the home. I don't have a problem where I rent.

• 1600

I don't have a problem at my workplace, because I enforce the Canadian Human Rights Act. I'm allowed to have her there, and I enforce it.

I do have a problem with the public, a major problem. I've been thrown of shopping malls by policemen. I have been told to leave many times. I've even been told to stay off the buses.

I had to enforce the Human Rights Act in all these cases by writing and complaining and by getting the help of people who are higher up, who have the authority to put in place the Human Rights Act.

I won't give her up. I take her everywhere, because the more you bond an animal with a human being, they will do their job almost perfectly every time.

I'm going to demonstrate that to you right now, unless you have any questions.

By the way, I will try to answer your questions. I have had a very severe hearing loss. I do a lot of lip-reading, but I also wear a very complex hearing aid, including a microphone, which is part of my hearing aid. But I will try to answer any questions you may have.

If not, I will just demonstrate.

The Chair: John, let's do the demonstration, and then we'll see if we have some questions. Okay?

Mr. John Hatton: Okay.

[Live Demonstration]

• 1605

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey (Edmonton North, Ref.)): Carolyn has to catch a 5 p.m. flight, so I will conduct the question and answer session.

Thank you, John, for coming, and for sharing Sox with us. We appreciate that.

I'd like to have just a general, open question period. We aren't many here today.

Madeleine.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Usually I speak in French at committee, but maybe I'll speak in English today.

I would like to ask John if he can approximate how his life is now better than it was seven years ago.

Mr. John Hatton: When I didn't have her, I used to go out and meet people—and this is just one example of many—and they would eventually get to know me and we would become friends. I would end up inviting them over to my home, and then a few days later I'd be broken into to. I'd wonder who it was.

When these people broke in, all they took was my wallet, but they turned the place upside down. These people, I can only assume, were the ones I had just recently met, because they knew I had a hearing disability. I would wake up in the morning and the only thing taken was my wallet.

When this happened three times, I became very nervous about meeting people. I didn't want to go out of my home. It made me very upset at work. I couldn't do my job very well.

Having the dog now gives me more confidence and more strength. It gives me an opportunity to move forward. I don't have to worry about every step I take. She's there.

• 1610

I sometimes had eye problems. The doctor told me my eyes were overworked because they were doing my hearing for me as well.

I depend on her to help me in many more ways. These are just a few examples.

Does that answer your question?

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: Yes. Thank you very much.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Wendy.

Ms. Wendy Lill (Dartmouth, NDP): I'm interested in knowing how many people in Canada are benefiting from dogs such as Sox.

How large a population has the advantage you do, John?

Mr. John Hatton: I can only give you the estimates that I know of from a few years ago. I'm sure it might be higher now.

According to what I was told by Hearing Ear Dogs of Canada, there are 98 hearing ear dogs in Ontario alone, and there are more across the country. These are only hearing ear dogs.

When I applied for her in 1992, there was a two-year waiting list, but because I needed her right away, they came up with her for me within six months. That meant somebody else had to wait longer.

That's the only example I can give you.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Maybe, Joanne, you have some figures countrywide.

Ms. Joanne Moss: You see, that's part of the problem in bringing issues forward. These kinds of statistics don't exist. There isn't any accurate information documented.

There are now, I believe, eight independent training facilities across Canada, and oftentimes they don't like to give out figures. So getting the information has been difficult, for one, but I was hoping, again, that by doing a needs assessment we'd have the credibility to be able to go into these facilities and request information and perhaps get them involved in a survey.

The only information I have come across, other than what John has, has come from volunteer work I've done for the Lions Foundation and Hearing Ear Dogs of Canada. Goss Gilroy was involved in a HALS survey in 1995 with regard to a transportation issue, to determine various types of transportation that individuals with disabilities were having difficulty accessing and so forth. There was a mention in there of service animals.

The statistics they came up with through the HALS survey was that back in 1995, approximately 1.4% of the population in Canada utilized service animals, travelled by various modes of transportation, and experienced a great deal of difficulty, not only with accessibility but with accommodation as well.

For example, I had gone to a meeting recently with the Air Transport Association of Canada about this, and it was strictly on airlines and the terminals. One of the difficulties there, for example, would be that if there's a stopover, the individual has to make a connecting flight, and they have only a half hour to do that. If it's a long flight, there has to be a place for the dog to relieve himself. For a person to find that spot for the dog and then to find the way back to the connecting flight can pose a great deal of difficulty. That was one of the issues we were trying to address.

As I say, the only information we do have is sketchy, because it's old. It's dated. But just the transportation issues alone show those kinds of numbers, and they're growing. They're definitely growing.

Ms. Wendy Lill: So it would be useful for you to have some questioning in a HALS study on that issue.

Ms. Joanne Moss: Absolutely. It would be very helpful.

Basically, what I've come up with, and what my experience has been and what I have heard from assistive training facilities themselves, and from the public—I've done a great deal of advocacy work in the public eye as well—and from transportation service providers, restaurant proprietors, or anybody who's providing a public service, is that everybody really wants to see more done in the area.

Because there isn't a central point to start with, there isn't that single entrance point, and it makes it very difficult. One advocacy case after the other isn't going to resolve a nationwide problem.

• 1615

I feel that by tackling the problem on a national level, we can cover a lot more territory. I have a really good example of that, if you wouldn't mind my sharing it with you.

Our web site currently has a survey on it. We were invited to participate in section 28 of the food services and food regulation code model that's being put together in cooperation with Health Canada and Agriculture Canada. A number of groups, such as the Consumers' Association and the Canadian Institute of Public Health Inspectors—and the list goes on and on—were invited to participate in this regulation.

Primarily, what's going to happen now that the code has been put together, and the model's together, is that they're going to share it with the provinces and encourage them to each adopt similar practices so that the consistency is there, the terminology is the same, and so on and so forth.

In that survey, section 8 pertained to guide animals. We posted a survey on our web site, and I contacted all of the training facilities in Canada, as many recipients as I could, to let them know this was happening, and it was their opportunity to be able to give their story, or their information, on what that terminology should be.

Should it still be “guide animal”? Most say no, because “service animal” is generic, and it works for everybody. It gives people the image that there's a working animal involved.

Secondly, what should that definition be?

The outcome of all of this, in short, has been that the model is now going to be changed. So there's a successful story involved here, which I'm really pleased about. The committee has agreed to amend the wording to include “service animal”, and they have included an up-to-date definition. That will be on our web site very shortly.

So that's something that has been accomplished recently.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Great.

Andy, and then Madeleine.

Mr. Andy Scott: John, how many times have you had to seek remedy from Human Rights, would you say?

Mr. John Hatton: It's hard to say, really. I didn't keep track of them all.

Very recently, I travelled to my home province, Prince Edward Island, and I was told by members of the staff at Tim Horton's to leave because of the dog.

Mr. Andy Scott: Is it because they don't understand an assistance dog that isn't Seeing Eye?

Mr. John Hatton: As you can see, she is very much identified for that very reason. By law, I don't really have to have any identification on her at all. I went out of my way to do this, for my own benefit, for the dog's benefit, and for the benefit of those who are questioning the situation. But even with all that I've done, I'm still being told to leave.

This is a very recent example. It happened over the Christmas holidays, when I went down to see my parents. I wasn't sure how to oppose this, because Prince Edward Island is a small province. I know people there, and people know me.

Now, I happen to know some of the people who run the Tim Horton's down there, so rather than jump to the media and to Human Rights and spread it all over the country, what I did, in order to get Human Rights to do what they're supposed to do, was take an internal approach to this problem. I wrote a letter to Tim Horton's asking them to educate their staff regarding service animals.

• 1620

I went so far as to provide them with copies of the Canadian Human Rights Act and the full legislation act that had been updated in Prince Edward Island. They came back to me with a letter from a lawyer, telling me that they will implement the law, but they wanted me to help them implement that law.

I don't have the resources to provide them with where to go to get the details of the law. That's not my job. What really offended me was the fact that they came back through a lawyer. I did it directly, out of friendship. I did it through a friend I knew, and it ended up coming back through a lawyer. There's no need for that.

Mr. Andy Scott: Do you have any idea of the information as it would relate to the same experience relating to Seeing Eye dogs? I'm just trying to get a sense of to what extent this is based on awareness, if that's our challenge, around just the existence of animal assistance that isn't related to something as familiar as Seeing Eye dogs.

Does anyone have any statistics as to the frequency of human rights applications around Seeing Eye dogs?

John, do you know about that?

Mr. John Hatton: My answer to that would be simply that I cannot speak on behalf of the blind or anybody else. But from my experience, as I just indicated to you, having these letters come back to me from a lawyer is a perfect example of why disabled people don't want to complain.

Therefore, I doubt there would be very many, for that very simple reason. People don't want to complain because lawyers will get involved, scaring disabled people off.

I made this point when I answered the letter, telling them to go to the Human Rights Act and to the Human Rights Commission to find out what the law is, and pass it on to their staff.

As far as statistics go, I'm sorry, I don't have the answer.

Mr. Andy Scott: You mentioned retail. You mentioned Tim Horton's, and you mentioned travel. Are there any other examples? You said you don't have a problem at work.

Mr. John Hatton: No, I don't, because I made it very clear at work what the Human Rights Act is. They abided by it. The first week I had problems, yes, because they didn't educate their security guards. It took them a full week, after I had complained at least ten times, for them to educate their security guards that I was bringing an animal to work every day.

I mean, once should be enough.

Mr. Andy Scott: Are there any jurisdictions that stand out as having done a good job of dealing with this issue?

Mr. John Hatton: There are a few in the federal government, yes. The federal government buildings I go into, they don't bother me. If I go into grocery stores, I have no problems, none whatsoever. But if I go into a clothing store, I have problems. If I go into coffee shops, I run into problems. It's places you wouldn't expect. And it's unnecessary. If they do it to me, what are they doing to the blind?

Mr. Andy Scott: Are there any other countries or any Canadian provinces that stand out as having dealt with this in any way?

• 1625

Mr. John Hatton: Yes. I'm glad you brought that up, because Prince Edward Island has the best law in this regard in the country. The reason they have it is that I was the one who created the problem for them to upgrade their law.

I did that because they physically removed me from the mall, using two policemen. After they'd done that, I heard that five months previously they had thrown out a lady with her Seeing Eye dog.

When they threw me out, being hard of hearing, I can live with it, but when I heard what they did to the blind, I made a commitment to myself that it wouldn't happen to anybody down there again. So they have the best law in the country right now.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Thank you.

Joanne, do you have anything you could add to that vis-à-vis the big picture?

Ms. Joanne Moss: Yes, I do.

First of all, again, statistics are lacking, and that's one of our points of interest and concern. But, yes, there are some cases noted, such as, for example, with the Canadian Transportation Agency. Because they deal with federal jurisdictions in transportation, such as air transport, boats, marine transport, and interprovincial issues and so on, they do have some past case histories where people have pressed charges against airlines and different transportation service providers.

So that does exist with the Canadian Transportation Agency. They're quite instrumental in helping to promote change, and that kind of thing. They're very much involved.

That's one of the groups, as I mentioned, we've actually worked with, and they're very keen on partnering and keeping involved to the extent that their mandate will permit them to do so.

As well, on the Canadian Human Rights Commission, just to let you know, interestingly enough there is no mention of guide animal in their act. It's actually a good will or good faith thing.

When I was looking up this information, I did come across a case where guide animals were mentioned; however, it was pointed out to me later that this was simply because of a case that had been pending. It had nothing to do with the actual wording of the act itself. The act itself refers to persons with disabilities. It's very generic as well, so it doesn't highlight the use of service animals.

Provincial legislation varies considerably from province to province, whether it be human rights, blind persons' rights acts, or public health acts. Again, guide animals may be mentioned, but not in all cases.

Part of the problem is the fact that now we do have several different types of service animals out there in circulation. If it's not allowed, and it's not wearing a leather harness, oftentimes people are threatened by the fact that the animals are present. Even if the dog does come from a training school in Canada, these individuals are encouraged to be their own advocates, to basically make sure they have identification on them and to make sure, if they are approached, they can inform whoever has approached them that this is a working animal.

What has been a pressing issue for some people that I have provided advocacy for is that people approach them but insist on knowing more about their disability, which is an invasion of their privacy and is certainly not necessary. That was one major concern.

Again, with the Blind Persons Rights Act, when I've met with some blind persons with guide dogs, one of the things raised was the difficulty in implementing any of these laws. Whether it be human rights acts, for example, or the code in this province, you're looking at a two-year waiting list. So by the time that's happened, everybody's forgotten about it, and changes just don't happen. It's already taken us over 60 years to accept the fact that guide dogs are present in Canada. So that's just another example.

Going back to the Blind Persons Rights Act, there is a fine that can be enforced if an individual is turned away from a facility. However, when the police are called in to enforce that law, they don't. That has happened on several occasions.

So the implementation process is not working, and again, our security people, our police officers and security teams, are just simply not aware of the legislation, and people are very leery of enforcing anything like that.

• 1630

Again, my experience has been that advocacy is not necessarily the answer. Working with both sides—for example, the service provider and the security guard or police officer—I find that education works wonders. Creating awareness does help a great deal, and oftentimes advocacy isn't necessary. But in order to educate people to that degree, to make that big of a difference at a national level, requires commitment and resources and so forth.

Unfortunately, we don't have the data you're requesting. We would very much like to be able to work with, for example, Goss Gilroy. They are very knowledgeable in putting together surveys like this in order to gather that kind of information.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): You say that education is the key. I think we'd probably all agree with that.

I shared with the committee awhile ago, and I think with you, the situation of Debbie Lees, who has a service dog in Edmonton. They won't let her in the schools.

So how do you educate?

Ms. Joanne Moss: You see, part of the problem is that I think we need to gather facts at this point as to what really is going on out there. What I have is individual cases. I can't reveal all of my sources and the files because of privacy considerations. However, with an overall survey, a lot of things could come out of that, and a needs assessment could follow.

Everybody, of course, will have their own issues. A blind person will have their issues, and so will a person who has a mobility impairment.

I guess what I'm getting at is that we could be going around in circles for another 60 years, and I don't think any... Personally, I would like to see some positive changes happen. The people I've been working with have also expressed an interest in seeing that happen.

In Debbie's case, what makes it difficult is that if she self-trained her dog, for example, then there is a lack of consistency right there, unfortunately. If the schools do not work together in Canada to come up with a very basic standard—for example, a standard of training for a service animal, certification standards, trade certification for themselves—to preserve what it is they are doing, anybody can virtually train an animal, call it a service animal, go to their doctor, say, “I need this dog”, and the doctor can sign a letter that this person carries in their pocket. It could be a Rottweiler or a pit bull, but that dog is out in circulation.

There have been injuries. There have been bad experiences. That's only because there is no infrastructure, and all of the schools work independently.

So we have that as a factor. That's a barrier in itself. Service providers do not get involved in the educational process we're talking about. They're busy enough trying to look at getting the breeding right, matching the teams, and all of that kind of thing, and educating people, but they don't get involved to any great extent in legislative issues and accessibility issues and accommodation and all that kind of thing.

Primarily, these people are on their own, and that's one of the reasons a group of Canadians with guide dogs are now forming their own association. They need to support one another.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): I think in Debbie's case, she trained the dog herself. I'm not sure of that fact; we'd have to check it.

Nonetheless, what she was wanting to do was get into the whole idea of training and starting a school for training dogs out there in Alberta. But you'd think it was 75 years ago. There just didn't seem to be any appetite for that whatsoever.

I guess we wonder how at the federal level we can say, “Because this province, or that province...”. I mean, what do we do?

Ms. Joanne Moss: Perhaps I can refer back to the executive summary. What we're trying to do also is to prioritize our issues so that we can get something going that's going to help today rather than ten years from now.

The HALS survey was one of the things that we were hoping you might be able to either re-direct us on or help guide us on how to network and partner with consultants who can help us get this going, and perhaps assign some financial resources to get it going.

I'm more than willing to work as a consultant with these people. This will very much help to identify what the barriers are. We will finally have that piece of paper that will give us the information we need. It will not just be little bits and pieces; we'll be able to collect it and keep it all together and know where we're going, and at least have some direction.

• 1635

Second, the needs assessment is also a very important piece of the puzzle. Patricia, for example, has mobility problems. She's in a wheelchair as well. As you know, the sidewalks outside curve down so that wheelchairs can go up and down. Well, that's actually very much of a detriment to a blind person, believe it or not.

So what concerns a person with a mobility problem will not necessarily concern a person with a visual impairment and so forth.

A needs assessment needs to be sectioned off, then, so that people with different kinds of disabilities can respond. Getting that kind of information is crucial to be able to make any kind of progress. It's working with the consumer, and providing the means to do it that is very important. Even if the schools can't get involved initially, I think reaching out to the consumers is important, letting them know that we support the use of service animals but also recognize that identifying working teams is difficult.

Again, the people I've been working with who have service animals are equally concerned, because they don't want to go into a public facility and be embarrassed or harassed.

They're saying, well, if the schools won't get involved to any extent with regard to educating the public with respect to the utilization of service animals in everyday living, who will?

That's one of the reasons we formed the organization. We were hoping we could become that support for Canadian consumers as well as encourage service providers wherever we possibly can.

I've already spoken to the board of education, for example, on trade certification, and they're more than willing to get involved. Again, the service providers are the primary stakeholders in that case, and would have very much say as to how that would take place.

The overall picture with regard to schools, for example, is that we have the International Federation of Guide Dog Schools, and they have memberships, but membership constitutes filling in a piece of paper and paying your membership dues. As far as making sure that each one of those schools is following their guidelines, they have no way of really effectively implementing it, although they would hope to do that.

For example, Canadian Guide Dogs for the Blind are in Manotick, and they are a member of the International Federation of Guide Dog Schools, whereas the Mira Foundation in Quebec is independent, and they work with a group in France. Then you have Pacific Assistance Dogs, which works independently.

Each group feels they're doing a top-notch job, and in many cases they are. We're not questioning their credibility or their expertise. But the consumer does not really have any idea what they're getting. If there is a problem, they have no recourse.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Thank you.

Madeleine, and then Andy maybe had another question.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: I was very impressed by the long list of health problems trained dogs can help with. I would like to know what your relations are with certain national groups. I am thinking, for instance, of The Arthritis Society and of the Canadian Multiple Sclerosis Society. Do you have contacts with those people? Do you exchange information with them? What sort of relations do you have with these groups who are very helpful to all of the persons who suffer from these diseases?

[English]

Ms. Joanne Moss: That's a very good question. Thank you for asking that.

I have been approached by various organizations, such as Epilepsy Ontario and the MS Society and so forth, and they've actually approached me for information because they were not able to get information on service animals.

When they approached me for that information, I would refer them to the various schools. I have a list. Of course, this organization is in a position where we will not refer one over the other. We're just basically providing that information to them and encouraging the consumer to ask a series of questions and to get to know what the policies are of obtaining that service animal, and what are the criteria for application of service animal—in other words, being eligible for a service animal.

Right now I would say we don't have a really in-depth partnership-building process with any of these organizations because of lack of resources. It's not just lack of resources, though; I think there's also the time factor. We incorporated just a year ago. I've done some networking with these groups. I see potential for a great partnership and work projects where we can all learn together.

• 1640

Those are all things I have on my to-do list. I hope we can put them together, because it's a great way of covering a lot of territory when you bring in all of these groups and you do it once, for all.

There are also a lot of opportunities for conferences and symposiums and all that kind of thing. Because we've actually received the endorsement of the Assistive Devices Industry Association of Canada, we may be able to work with them in a joint symposium, or that kind of thing, because they're doing the exact same thing we're doing. They're trying to bring together all of the technical assistive-device producers in Canada to build an infrastructure so that the quality of remedial and assistive devices in Canada will be improved and will be maintained at a certain level and the consumer will be buying a safe and useful product.

This is all grassroots stuff. We're all just starting to try to figure out how we can build those relationships and how we are going to go about doing that and so on. They're still tackling those questions themselves.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: In the same vein, what are your relations with health professionals? I'm thinking for instance of nursing associations and associations of family practitioners or specialists. I am thinking of rhumatologists and neurologists, for instance. Are you an important element in all of their therapeutic decisions?

[English]

Ms. Joanne Moss: At this point in time, I would say there definitely is interest in the medical profession to get involved. In fact, recently the medical journal did publish an article. I was interviewed by them. They did send word out.

I did get some response. There are some doctors who are willing to sit on health committees, not only in the service animal area but also to address therapeutic riding as well as animal-assisted therapy programs, which seniors primarily get involved in. There is a great deal of interest.

In the United States this kind of thing is starting to happen more and more, and in Europe most definitely. There has been a neurologist, who deals primarily with individuals who have epilepsy, who has gone international and informed many doctors about the use of a seizure alert dog, for example.

I think there's a lot of opportunity to build relationships and to get them involved, but we have to have the resources to put together those committees. Again, even as an organization we need to look at prioritizing our issues and our work plan to make sure we're developing things one step at a time.

We need that basis, that good, solid foundation—information—to determine what our priorities will be.

So there's definitely been a great deal of interest from the medical field in terms of getting involved.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Thank you, Madeleine.

We have about 15 minutes left. I'll recognize Andy and then Wendy.

Mr. Andy Scott: Did I understand you to say that if the priority is basically gathering information, so that decisions are taken on the basis of good information, that exercise, if it were resourced, could also serve the function of the networking exercise that is necessary to draw the organizations together? I presume that's the source of most of the information, be it through professional associations or consumer groups or whatever.

Is that fair to say?

Ms. Joanne Moss: That's right, most definitely.

Mr. Andy Scott: I'm interested, John, in your taxes, which shouldn't scare you too much. Someone mentioned earlier the costs associated with food and training.

Is it all covered under medical expenses?

Mr. John Hatton: Yes. Revenue Canada recognizes a service animal as a dependant. So all my expenses are deductible.

Very recently I had her taken to the vet. I can't speak for other veterinarian patients, but where I take her, the bill is cut 50% because she's a working animal. I don't know if all veterinarians do that, but they've always done it where I've taken her.

• 1645

So I think they've done it in their own way. It might be their standard or it might be a standard somewhere else. I don't know. But they've taken 50% off the bill.

Mr. Andy Scott: I ask that because it's another compelling argument for gathering information and dealing with questions of credentials if in fact there is a tax implication.

My fear, of course, would be that I wouldn't want to alert Revenue Canada to the issue, either. As a member of Parliament, I say that, and not as a...

So I think it would be another argument that's available to the committee on the need to gather good information.

Finally, I guess probably by accident, we've had reasonably good public policy response to this. Is there any place where we have a really bad public policy response, other than what you've mentioned?

Mr. John Hatton: I went to another veterinarian who took only 10% off the bill. That was a completely different facility and everything. They also told me that the veterinarian I requested would not see me. I had to take a particular veterinarian. I had wanted this one because he was recommended to me by a friend. He wouldn't take me because they claimed he was overbooked or something.

Mr. Andy Scott: I was thinking about the medical expenses, and the inclusion of your costs in the medical expense deduction, as being the good public policy. I'm thinking of the responsibility of the Government of Canada right now. Is there someplace we could practically improve your life around your animal right now that we just haven't because we're not aware?

Mr. John Hatton: I'm not sure I understand the question.

Mr. Andy Scott: Well, I'm surprised that we have good coverage under medical expenses because of the lack of understanding of the issue. It comes as a bit of a surprise to me that we cover this. I guess every once in awhile...

Now, that caused me to think, okay, I'll bet you there's a lot of places where you haven't been so lucky, and the government hasn't been so lucky to do it right. Is there one that you could point to where the government policy is bad—not because anybody wants it to be, but because they just are insensitive, they don't understand, they're not aware?

Mr. John Hatton: Are you speaking federally or provincially?

Mr. Andy Scott: Federally.

Mr. John Hatton: Federally is pretty good. They treat her like a dependant, so all my expenses are deductible. That's the only thing they do, but I'm quite satisfied with that.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): How about you, Joanne? Would you like to respond to that? I saw that smile.

Ms. Joanne Moss: Actually, something came to mind when we were talking about Revenue Canada that's kind of interesting.

We were asked to attend National Access Awareness Week a couple of years ago. We do that. We set up kiosks from time to time.

We were in a Revenue Canada building. Of course, knowing that they're aware that there are guide animals, basically... I think they might reference hearing ear dogs now. I'd have to go back and look at the bulletin. For the most part, that's slowly changing as well.

At any rate, we were denied access to the building. It was kind of interesting. There was a real battle getting these individuals with service animals into the building for National Access Awareness Week.

When it came time to have these people picked up, they called their cabs to take them home. John, especially, was denied access to a Blue Line cab.

I know that's not a federal issue—it's still a provincial issue in this case—but that's just another indication of the need for education and so forth.

In this case, it's also cultural. In speaking with taxi companies and the unions, a lot of the barrier there would be cultural, because this individual comes from a country where they either eat animals or definitely don't let them in the house. That's considered a very dirty animal, so they do not want them in their taxis. That's a very important issue. I've actually touched base with Heritage Canada on that.

• 1650

Revenue Canada—it can become dicey. It's not necessarily a black or white issue with respect to claiming those expenses.

What's becoming more difficult when people are claiming, I'm learning from recipients, is that if the dog doesn't come from a school, if there's no identification and then you go back to all of the other concerns, then it becomes a problem. If they're ever audited, how do they prove that dog was a service animal? If they can't prove it, then it becomes an issue.

So the identification of these animals and the level of training that's required consistently across the country, or even coming into the country, is very important. I have people calling me all the time who are coming in from different countries, and they ask me what the laws are for crossing a border.

If it's Great Britain, for example, well, there doesn't seem to be a problem there, but for Canadians crossing borders, international quarantine is an issue. That's another area, and that's where Foreign Affairs comes in.

There's just a multitude of possibilities, as you can see, and a lot of barriers that need to be addressed. That's why it needs to be prioritized. It's an amazing thing. From a lot of the research I personally have done, I've realized there are so many resources out there we can tap into that already exist without going to a great deal of expense.

Even on an international level, there's RabNet, which is a huge network that deals strictly with health-related issues—rabies issues, quarantine. They've done a multitude of work that would be necessary to remove barriers with respect to quarantines of service animals.

I've connected with Great Britain's educational minister, because he has a dog named Lucy, and he's had problems. Senators in the United States have had problems going into the Senate with their dogs. I mean, this is an international problem, and the laws do vary considerably.

As Canadians on a federal level, starting there and hoping to network with the provinces... I'm sorry, but I don't know enough about this committee to know whether or not we would be able to request that help from you with respect to working on a national project and with being able to communicate with all of your provincial contacts.

For example, working with Health Canada, I know there's a network in place where we would have contacts with all of the provinces and territories, with representatives from each of those areas. Again, you're working on a project of shared interest.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Thank you.

Wendy is next.

Ms. Wendy Lill: I was going to ask the same kind of questions Andy was asking about taxes and Revenue Canada.

How do you get on the rolls, so to speak? Do you have to go to a doctor, say, to get a form filled out, saying you need a service dog, or is there some professional who has to give you their blessing, which then stays with Revenue Canada on file and so on? How does that work?

Mr. John Hatton: In my case, all I did was file one medical report, my own medical, here in the community. They take your word permanently.

As well, I filed one report on my service animal when I got her, in 1992. They have that on file, and I have never had to remind them again. So it's a one-time thing.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Joanne, I'm wondering if something more uniform would give everybody a lot more of a comfort level. I mean, the idea of Revenue Canada coming back to somebody after five years, trying to review them to take back certain costs, is just a horrifying idea. I wondered if there were any examples of that.

Ms. Joanne Moss: As far as I know, nobody's actually been faced with that, but there's always the fear of either losing a service animal or these kinds of things hanging over one's head. I do know of people who have actually turned in their service animals because they've had so many difficulties with accessibility. The harassment and the embarrassment were too much for them to bear, so they sent their dogs back to the school.

• 1655

As far as Revenue Canada is concerned, I have contacted them. I've spoken to them about it. It's an area that they know needs to be addressed, but it's not part of their mandate to address all of these issues that we're concerned about. They are willing to work with a group that is willing to address them, though.

As a point of interest, just to let you know, the application procedure for obtaining a service animal does vary from school to school. That is a varying factor. As well, in the United States, The Seeing Eye provides a lot of the guide dogs that come into Canada for Canadians. Those dogs are sold outright. That dog becomes the property of the individual. There's nobody overseeing what the individual does with that dog, and the accessibility issues and so forth. They're on their own.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Madeleine, quickly.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: I'd like to get back to your presentation. You told us where one could obtain these helping animals, but you said something I did not understand. You can explain it to me. You said that allergies were a very serious problem because these dogs do go into public places. There are many dogs in public places. I don't understand. Could you explain what you meant?

[English]

Ms. Joanne Moss: It has been brought to my attention by the Canadian Human Rights Commission that there is a case pending. In that particular instance, there was a situation where an individual with a guide dog wanted to access a flight, but a person with an allergy to dogs wanted to access that same flight. Both people have a right to fly in that plane, so whose rights prevail?

The person with the allergy declined. They are basically looking at that now. The case is still pending, so I don't have the outcome, unfortunately.

The national allergy association was pointing out that because we're talking about confined areas—in a restaurant, for example—when a person is in close proximity to a dog, if they are allergic they're going to react to that dog. If you're in a home, and you know you're allergic to an animal, you're not going to have one, so that's not an issue. But once you get out into public areas, where these dogs are in circulation, that can be a problem.

Where the National Allergy Association was coming from primarily was that they were looking at animal-assisted therapy programs, and working with seniors. They have noticed, in this particular case, that a lot of seniors are extremely allergic to cats. So these programs benefit some Canadian seniors because of the bonding and all of the interaction that's going on with the animals, but then the person sitting next to them, another senior, has an allergy to that cat. How can they still run a program in that particular instance and know that everybody's going to benefit?

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: I can tell you that I am allergic to cats. Perhaps I should prove it. I always say that no one should bring a cat anywhere near me because I will choke and die. No one dares to do it.

[English]

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Thank you.

Let me ask you one last question, as we wrap up.

The federal government provides assistance with technical devices for people. Would they facilitate providing service animals for federal employees? If somebody works for the federal government, for instance, they would get assisted with special computers or some type of technical devices. Would they also make provision for a service animal?

Ms. Joanne Moss: In other words, would they pay for the cost for obtaining a service animal?

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Yes.

Ms. Joanne Moss: I don't know of anybody who's necessarily even asked that question. A lot of the schools in Canada—actually, all of the schools in Canada, I believe—get their funding from the public and other types of fund-raising. So funding of that nature has never been in question.

Something I think we would want to look into further down the road would be that once the certification has been looked at and perhaps accepted—that is, there'd be a more acceptable practice as far as forming a standards infrastructure—then those kinds of things could come forth, and there could be that possibility of help. The federal government could provide some funding to the school, for example, to help that individual obtain a service animal. That could be another source of funding.

• 1700

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): If they get technical assistance, if you will, a special computer or something, and that person leaves the employ of the federal government, then they don't get to take that with them. The thing gets put in a closet someplace. That would be difficult to do with a service animal.

Ms. Joanne Moss: That's a possibility as well.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Yes.

Ms. Joanne Moss: I believe that would have to be something worked out between the school—if they were interested—and the federal government in that particular case.

I've spoken to some of the trainers and presidents of various schools, and they primarily prefer to get their funding from the public, only because getting government funding may be a deterrent for the public to donate funds. Indirectly, though, we were hoping that as an organization we might be able to provide some assistance down the road to schools in the way of all of these other barriers—indirect support as opposed to direct support.

The Acting Chair (Miss Deborah Grey): Yes.

Thank you very much, all of you who have come this afternoon. On behalf of the committee, I would like to express our appreciation. This has been an excellent presentation.

John, I thank you and Sox for coming. We just enjoyed having you so much.

We'll carry on on this side, and you carry on on that side, and let's hope we can make a difference for people right across the country.

Again, I thank you all for coming.

It's 5 p.m., and we are adjourned.