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, June 3, 1999

• 1111

[English]

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

Before I welcome the minister, I would like to draw everyone's attention to this very special guest who will be observing our subcommittee meeting today. It's my pleasure to welcome Josephine Sinyo at the back, who is a member of the Canada-Kenya parliamentary association. She's accompanied by Mr. Angelo Nikias, the director of government relations and international liaison for the CNIB.

Ms. Sinyo, Josephine, we're honoured to have you present at this subcommittee meeting. Thank you both for taking time to join us here today.

We now welcome Minister Massé; Kay Stanley, the assistant secretary, employment equity division; and Joan Ouellette, director, employment equity division. Thank you very much for coming. As some of the members know, it's been on a number of occasions that we at committee have been able to observe some of the excellent work that Treasury Board does in actually tracking our issue, and we look forward to your presentation.

Hon. Marcel Massé (President of the Treasury Board, Lib.): Thank you very much, Madam Chair.

[Translation]

Madam Chair, dear colleagues, thank you for the invitation to appear before this committee. I am pleased to participate and contribute to your work on this very important issue. I'm especially pleased to be here during National Access Awareness Week. To help celebrate this event, I have brought, for the members of this committee, posters on the Job Accommodation Network initiative.

[English]

This is going to be produced this year. It's a joint work by Treasury Board and the Public Service Commission. It permits people to know where they can get help in various areas. A copy of the posters will be distributed to every member of the committee.

[Translation]

As President of Treasury Board, my responsibilities include the management of the government's financial, personnel and administrative functions.

Treasury Board is the employer and general manager of the Government of Canada. As the employer, Treasury Board establishes the terms and conditions under which most departments and agencies of the public service attract and retain the staff needed to meet statutory policy and program requirements.

A special concern is to ensure that the federal public service is representative of the society it is designed to serve. To achieve a representative work force, we need to ensure that the workplace is welcoming to all.

We need to pay particular attention to the recruitment and retention of persons with disabilities and this includes ensuring that their work environment will enhance their day-to-day contribution rather than act as a deterrent.

• 1115

My intention, today, is to be brief in order to allow the time for dialogue and to address your questions.

The purpose of the Employment Equity Act is to achieve equality in the workplace so that no person shall be denied employment opportunities or benefits for reasons unrelated to ability. A fundamental principle of the Act, employment equity means more than treating persons in the same way but also requires special measures and the accommodation of differences.

Despite the reduction in the size of the public service in recent years, the representation of persons with disabilities has continued to increase. However, while there has been steady increase in representation, progress remains slow and there is still room for improvement.

The federal public service must continue to demonstrate exemplary leadership to ensure fuller employment participation of persons with disabilities.

[English]

On December 14, 1998, I announced the creation of a task force on an inclusive public service, chaired by Dr. Janet Smith. She will be developing practical ways by which public service leaders can contribute to a more inclusive and effective public service. The situation of persons with disabilities is receiving attention through this initiative. There are also many opportunities at hand on which we need to concentrate our efforts.

Recruitment into the public service is on the rise and new technologies will further enable the full participation and contribution of persons with disabilities. The Public Service Commission, in partnership with departments, the private sector, national disability organizations, and service providers has implemented additional recruitment strategies. Developmental initiatives include designing mentoring programs and improving the participation rate in existing development programs such as the career assignment program, the accelerated executive development program, and the management trainee program.

Historically, a major barrier facing persons with disabilities has been the question of accommodation. It is important that we acknowledge that persons with disabilities can and must be accommodated. It is the law. The Canadian Human Rights Act was amended on June 5, 1998 to add the duty to accommodate.

My department, the Treasury Board Secretariat, has revised the policy on provision of services to employees with disabilities. Provisions in this policy include allowing employees to retain adaptive equipment as they move from position to position within the public service and ensuring that they have full access to all electronic networks. This revised policy will shortly be made available to all departments and agencies.

My department is also exploring options and costs for the development and implementation of a comprehensive disability management program and systematic accommodation practices to ensure that all employees with disabilities receive the technical aids they require. In the supplementary estimates tabled on October 29, 1998, $10 million were set aside for the positive measures program. This program has been established to address systemic barriers to employment equity.

The positive measures program promotes greater self-sufficiency within departments and agencies as they work toward achieving their objectives under the Employment Equity Act. Several initiatives focus on the needs of persons with disabilities. One is the job accommodation network, which seeks to establish an integrated health network for departments and agencies when putting in place accommodation measures for disabled employees.

• 1120

A second initiative, jointly sponsored by Human Resources Development Canada and my department, is a survey on workplace accommodation, which will address existing information gaps on workplace accommodation. This information will be used to improve policy development and program design.

[Translation]

Another positive measure is the integration of persons with disabilities through new information and communication technologies. This is an inter-departmental effort sponsored by Treasury Board and the National Research Council. By examining any available information technologies we will be in a position to ensure that persons with disabilities have the necessary adaptive technologies to support their access to equitable employment and career opportunities.

Everyone here knows that I am an advocate of accountability and performance measurement. In my role as general manager of the federal public service, I have ensured that results based on accountability are always a key part of managing any initiative. To achieve desired results the federal government needs to track its actions and measure the outcomes.

My department is working with Human Resources Development Canada to develop an accountability framework in support of the federal strategy for persons with disabilities. This work is being done in consultation with all departments and agencies involved in the delivery of programs for persons with disabilities.

The accountability framework will identify key indicators, provide their measurement and will include the development of a consolidated approach for reporting.

As you are aware, much has been done with Human Resources Development Canada to design a multi-jurisdictional accountability framework. This framework will be consistent with the federal- provincial-territorial document In Unison: A Canadian Approach to Disability Issues made public in October, 1998, and the principles outlined in the social union framework agreement.

[English]

I just have a few more minutes, Madam Chair, but there have been a number of important developments in the last two years that I think have to be outlined.

[Translation]

A few years ago, at the request of a committee of the House of Commons, Treasury Board approved and implemented a new reporting system. Each department and agency provides Parliament with a report on plans and priorities in the spring and a performance report in the fall.

At this time, we acknowledge that this approach in not particularly suited to assessing the collective results of all initiatives related to persons with disabilities. Therefore, we are looking at ways to identify common indicators and approaches to measurement which will allow for a more consolidated approach to reporting.

[English]

I've been advised that your committee received a compilation of the information on disability issues from the departmental performance reports on plans and priorities. I would welcome your comments on the usefulness of this compilation. Your views on further elements that should be considered in the development of consolidated reporting mechanisms would also be very much appreciated.

Turning now to the response to the Scott task force, I note the changes that have been made. For instance, the Canadian Human Rights Act was amended to add duty to accommodate, which was a recommendation, I believe, of your committee. The Canada Evidence Act was amended to allow for provision of communication assistance in criminal courts.

Also, you will recall that the Access to Information Act and the Privacy Act were amended to include specific references to making information available to persons with sensory disabilities. As you know, Human Resources Development Canada, who have the overall responsibility for serving Canadians with disabilities, have negotiated agreements with the provinces under the employability assistance for persons with disabilities initiative. This program is designed to help persons with disabilities find and keep jobs. The federal contribution to this initiative alone is $193 million yearly.

• 1125

Other measures have been put in place. Government-wide information policies, such as guidelines on how to provide alternative formats and access to all, have been strengthened to provide detailed guidelines to assist in disseminating information to persons with sensory disabilities. The Government of Canada Internet guide has been revised to include the concept of universal accessibility, and the Treasury Board Secretariat is also working with Public Works and Government Services Canada on a number of important files, such as enhancing the Canada Gazette to allow for its production in alternative formats.

We are proceeding with revisions to the guidelines on crown asset disposal, which could include the delegation of authority from the Minister of Public Works to all ministers for disposal of crown assets under their control.

[Translation]

We are looking at including specific reference to the disposal of technical aids used by employees with disabilities. Ministers could exercise their authority to allow employees with disabilities leaving the employment of the public service to retain their technical aids. Of course, these decisions should be based on criteria that would include their potential use by other employees. This could contribute to increased mobility to the private sector of these individuals, as well as adding to their overall quality of life.

[English]

Members of the committee, in conclusion, this is a very important issue and a truly horizontal file. You have had several presentations from my cabinet colleagues, who have also discussed with you a number of challenges and opportunities. We need to continue working in partnership to support the government's agenda on disability issues and to continue to identify the opportunities to further contribute to the federal strategy.

[Translation]

We need to ensure that policy decisions reflect the concerns and needs of persons with disabilities, address accommodation issues, and ensure the continued development of programs to recruit and retain employees with disabilities.

[English]

I will stop here because I promised to be brief and to allow sufficient time for your comments and questions, but I wanted to have an update of the various recent measures that have been taken in order to try to improve the condition of people with disabilities. Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

We'll begin the questioning with Mr. Epp.

Mr. Ken Epp (Elk Island, Ref.): I thank you, Mr. Minister, for coming with your officials here today to discuss this very important issue. I suppose that only those of us who have friends or acquaintances or family who have disabilities have a fuller understanding of what people deal with when they have these disabilities. Many people, I think, are not directly affected and don't have even that small understanding. I have several friends who are in that category, and they tell me about their challenges. In fact, one of my friends not long ago lost his job because he was just not any longer able to function in it and is now severely disabled, I guess would be the word.

I'd like to ask you this. In your department—obviously providing for the needs of the disabled is a costly matter—do you provide in your budget estimates separate amounts to deal specifically with the costing that's necessary in order to provide opportunities for the disabled?

Mr. Marcel Massé: I wanted to confirm this, because this is an important question.

The way the budgets are done, there is a certain allocation for staff, of course, and then in the budget for accommodation, which means a payment of space and so on, there are allocations, for instance, for special access ramps to be built. You know how the budgets are constituted.

Mr. Ken Epp: Yes.

Mr. Marcel Massé: What we try to do is make all the managers aware of the responsibilities they have for persons with disabilities and the fact that this will lead in their plans to special provisions—for instance, to have proper access for people with various disabilities, to have accommodation that will permit, for instance, wheelchairs to be placed there, or accommodation that will permit blind people to be able to have not only the technical means they need but the environment they need.

• 1130

There is no special budget that is given, for instance, for access and accommodation. But when we make our general plans for investment in the next year's budget, we have there a list of the plans the managers want to implement, and in these we make sure they take into account their responsibilities vis-à-vis people with disabilities.

Mr. Ken Epp: If I could just interrupt here, we know that the government is a huge bureaucracy, with layers upon layers of managers and sub-managers and so on. Let's just picture eight or ten levels down, there's a manager in a department, and maybe he's overseeing forty or fifty people in his little department or division. There's a person working there who begins to have eyesight problems, but that person can still continue to function if provided with special equipment. The one I'm thinking of involves a special television mechanism with the ability to magnify the pages he's working on.

In government departments, if that happens, is it easy or difficult for that manager to get approval for a $10,000 piece of equipment to accommodate this person who has worked in that department but who now faces some real challenges? Is it easy or is it difficult?

Mr. Marcel Massé: You have to measure degrees of ease. What I would say, certainly, is that it is easier now than it was five years ago, and much, much easier than it was ten years ago.

In principle, you're quite right, this should be taken into account and made extremely easy. It should be normal; it should be part of normal operations.

What we've tried to do is two things. The first one is sensitize the managers to the fact that if a person develops a disability like that, then that person has rights in terms of the duty of the government to accommodate the increasing disability of that person. Don't forget, the duty to accommodate was put in the law only in 1998. We're talking about a relatively recent recognition that employers, and in particular the public service, have that duty.

In the plans for spending of the people who deal with technical aids, like a special screen, we have contingencies. Now we're sensitizing our managers to the fact that these contingencies include the duty to accommodate, and in that specific case to have a special screen to do it.

Now, training employees is something that takes a bit of time, and making them sensitive to the needs of people with disabilities also. This is why I do not dare answer your question by saying it is now very easy. I think it's a process of making it easier through education of our own staff.

Mr. Ken Epp: Okay. Have you ever given consideration to the setting up of a separate funding mechanism, apart from the individual departments? If these types of things occur, the individual manager has to say “I don't have it in my budget”. He goes up and tries to find if you have it in your budget. Sometimes transfers can be made; I'm aware of that. But have you ever given thought to having a special sort of a mother fund, so that if there's an individual in the service who requires needs that were unanticipated, they can access that fund directly, without having to go through the usual rigamarole of budget approvals? Because quite often this type of thing occurs quite quickly.

Mr. Marcel Massé: The answer to that is yes. We don't have a special fund at the level of the government, because that would just be too complex and heavy.

Mr. Ken Epp: Okay.

Mr. Marcel Massé: But at the level of departments themselves, you have two potential sources. The first one is the personnel department, which usually, by the way, is a large budget by its own and so on. The second one is the materiel management division.

In the materiel management, this is where, for instance, they'll give you a new computer when you need one and so on. That section has a rather large budget for acquisitions, because every year you have a lot to do. Therefore the manager of that section where somebody is developing a disability can go to the people in personnel. And usually they will go to Kay, because in each department now we've created the section where people can go, make a call, and say “I've got the following problem. What can I do?” Then they get guidance on where they can get the money, what kind of help they can get, and from which budget it can be had. And the money doesn't have to be in the budget of the specific manager; it can be centralized.

• 1135

Mr. Ken Epp: That's a good answer.

Do you have more time? I forgot my fancy clock today that I use to time myself.

The Chair: Well, you can have two more minutes because you didn't bring your own clock.

Mr. Ken Epp: Thank you. I actually have a stopwatch here, but I didn't start it. But I usually have that nice one.

I have another question. When it comes to hiring new employees, very subtly a manager who's conducting the interviews has to have in the back of his mind, “If I hire that person, that's going to make my life a lot more difficult because of that disability”, because it is a challenge sometimes to accommodate the special needs of people who have disabilities, as opposed to those who have no disabilities. Do you have any mechanism in place to assure that this kind of a prejudice does not enter into hiring practices in the service?

Mr. Marcel Massé: The answer is yes. I think you're touching the core of the problem. The core of the problem is attitudes, and especially attitudes that we have to change.

The problem relates not only to persons with disabilities like blindness or something like this, but in all the areas of employment equity it appears. The traditional one about women has not entirely disappeared, but it's certainly much, much less than it was. There is still one about visible minorities, where a lot of managers still entertain the idea that if I hire a person from a visible minority I may have problems and so on—exactly the one you described.

As a result, we have increased the number of training programs for managers, and we give special instructions to all the people who are on the boards that judge either new hires or promotions. And we're having some success, because the proof of the pudding is in the eating. In 1996-97 the proportion of people with disabilities in our labour force was about 3.3%. In 1997-98 it had increased to 3.9%. And by the way, that has to be measured with the goal, because this is what we call availability of people with disabilities in the categories of people we employ, that is about 4.8%. We have not moved to 4.8%, so we still have ground to cover. But we have moved in a significant manner, from 3.3% to 3.9% in one year, in order to improve our performance on this.

We still have a lot of training to do. The kind of attitude that you indicate I think does exist, and we have to change it over time. I think we're being reasonably successful at improving the situation.

Mr. Ken Epp: Thank you very much.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

So you're saying that the attitude of the manager or the performance of the manager on these issues of employment equity is actually part of their performance appraisal.

Mr. Marcel Massé: Yes.

The Chair: Okay. Thank you.

Mr. Marcel Massé: The attitude of managers toward employment equity, all the categories, is now part of evaluation.

The Chair: Thank you.

[Translation]

Ms. Dalphond-Guiral.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral (Laval Centre, BQ): Minister, I want to greet, in you, the Canadian government's great administrator. I have a few questions for you. As I still don't have my alarm clock with me, I am counting on the chair to time me.

My first question has to do with the rate of growth in hiring persons with disabilities during the last 10 years. You are probably in a position to tell us what that rate is. Everyone recognizes that persons with disabilities have a right to services and also a right to work. The element that most determines whether one is a fully participating citizen is probably the fact that one can earn one's own living in the economy.

• 1140

Some groups in this society of ours had the same demands, women were one of those groups, they're not doing too badly and their situation is improving. Visible minorities and the Aboriginals also had similar demands.

If we were to compare the rate of growth in the ranks of Aboriginals, visible minorities and persons with disabilities, where would the latter be on the scale? This comparison would be a revealing indication of the attitude of people as well as an indication of our good will.

Mr. Marcel Massé: You're alluding to many other reports. I'll call on my memory. I think my figures are right, but I'll check them out and confirm them later on.

During the last 10 years, progress was made in all categories, including during the last few years when a program review was set up that translated into a decrease of almost 20% of the public service.

The category that came out best was women. We're probably more conscious of the discrimination against them and this discrimination seems to be the one most rapidly disappearing in people's minds.

People with disabilities rank second. Unfortunately, little progress has been made in the case of Aboriginals. The greatest difficulties were found with the visible minorities. A very slight improvement was noted as they now represent 2.7% of the public service rather than 2.6%. This is a rather insignificant increase.

More particularly, over the last three or four years, we've witnessed a great improvement in the presence of persons with disabilities. We base this on the statistics obtained by Statistics Canada, who gets this information from these persons themselves.

Now, as you know, not every member of a visible minority nor every person with a disability will place themselves in those categories. We think that between 38 and 40% of persons with disabilities don't mention the fact. If we adjust our statistics to take this into account, we're probably close to an equitable proportion of persons with disabilities in the public service. Our objective is still to attain a proportion equivalent to the statistics relative to the general population.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: During your presentation, you said you were considering including specific reference to the possibility that persons with disabilities working in the public service and to whom you provide technical aids to do a certain number of tasks might be able to keep this equipment when they leave the public service. That's an excellent idea.

Now, we know that society has more and more self-employed workers in its ranks. Do you believe it would be a good idea to whisper into the Finance Minister's ear that it would be desirable to grant tax credits to persons with disabilities who acquire technical aids with a view to becoming self-employed workers?

Mr. Marcel Massé: The role of Treasury Board, of course, is to manage the government's departments.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: That certainly doesn't prevent one from speaking up.

Mr. Marcel Massé: Even if I have responsibility for managing public funds, I have no objection to that idea as it could help persons with disabilities to join the labour market more readily.

The Minister of Finance might answer that he must also take into account the fact that many people, all of a sudden, might want to acquire equipment and that he'd have no way of checking whether the equipment is used as intended.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: I'm sure there are ways of checking that out.

Mr. Marcel Massé: He'd also probably have to ask for guaranties, but the idea is certainly worth examining.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: My third question is a bit more specific and has to do with services for people with hearing problems. With age, I know this is something that may be just around the corner for me; you understand I have a very clear interest. We're told that in Canada, almost 7,000 people are totally deaf and need sign language interpreters in order to be able to communicate. It seems to me it's extremely difficult to be able to obtain the services of an interpreter in any given federal government service. Would it be possible to correct this situation? We know how hard it is for a person with a disability to move around. Let's take the example of a deaf person showing up at the Immigration Department and being asked to prove the need for a sign language interpreter. Although I can understand this requirement, it's very humiliating to have to prove you're deaf to a civil servant who, in theory, is there to serve you. When it's finally recognized that the person is deaf, that person is then asked to come back a fourth night or three weeks later.

• 1145

There are rather revealing figures. To avoid any kind of mistake, I'll consult the documents I have in hand. It seems that in Quebec, in the Quebec City region, and in the National Capital Region, the federal government offers a regional interpretation service for the deaf or people who are visually impaired. It says that during the 1996-97 fiscal year, there was only one request made while during the 1995-96 fiscal year, three were made. If requests are that few, one might be led to believe that these people never asked for those services. But I think that the greatest burden is borne by the non-profit organizations. Those organizations have taken on the costs of those services for people who need them. We must certainly examine this situation more closely. I'm trusting you to do this job.

Mr. Marcel Massé: I will give a broader answer because I am sure that there are no statistics on the number of people whose requests disappeared in the system. There is no doubt that a large number of conditions must be met for such requests to be granted. In order to provide a deaf person a government service that is equal to the service offered to other citizens, special instruments must be used. For example, it goes without saying that a deaf person appearing in court needs the services of an interpreter. In order to reduce costs, and this must be done, the government needs to obtain some kind of proof that the person actually has a disability. I understand the human point of view that you are expressing, but we would not be able to provide services on request with no assessment and at the same time show taxpayers that our administration is efficient. These taxpayers ask us to ensure that these services are really necessary. So there we have a problem.

In most cases, when a person with a disability must appear in court, it is the lawyer who takes the necessary steps to engage the services of the required experts. That is one way of resolving the problem. As well, community assistance groups are sometimes called on. In most of these areas, there are now community groups that can help the person and that know how to contact the specialists who can be of help. In most cases, the people with disabilities make their own arrangements. Should the State assume the costs for this? I believe so. Should the State have its own pool of experts that it can turn to for the necessary services?

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: I believe so.

Mr. Marcel Massé: I also believe so. But if we want to justify setting up such a pool, we need to ensure that there are enough people who will benefit from this. We could also face schedule problems. If we agreed to provide a deaf person with the services of a specialized interpreter for a court appearance, we might have to require a specific court date. The interpreter might not be available on request because we would have to assume exorbitant costs. I do believe, however, that the State has a duty to provide specialized services to people with disabilities in order to help them.

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: I am afraid my time is up.

• 1150

The Chair: Yes.

Ms. Lill.

[English]

Ms. Wendy Lill (Dartmouth, NDP): Thank you very much for coming here to see us. I just want to talk about some general things.

First of all, I have an extract from the employment equity in the federal public service document, the annual report to Parliament. I just want to ask you about one figure. It says that nine out of ten employees with disabilities are indeterminate employees. I'm just wondering what that category means—indeterminate.

Mr. Marcel Massé: It means people who are employed long-term, as opposed to term employees who are employed for a specific period of time.

Ms. Wendy Lill: All right. So this is full-time, long-term work.

Mr. Marcel Massé: That's it.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Okay.

I have a question I think we all want to dwell on a bit, and that is the whole issue of the invisibility of people with disabilities. I'm looking around this room and I don't see anyone here who needs some sort of accommodation because of their disability, aside from me because I can't speak French, so I have this thing in my ear.

Mr. Marcel Massé: Attilio, who works with us, is in a wheelchair.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Okay. I'm sorry, I don't see your wheelchair. That's good to know.

I had a meeting with a member of Parliament from Uganda last month, and in Uganda they have disabled members—I mean that as category. They have women members, labour members, and different disabled members. The reason for that is they are trying to kick-start their awareness around the issue of disability.

Their democracy is new and their whole democratic experiment is new, so they're trying to do it right. They don't see this as a permanent fixture in terms of these categories, but they're doing it now so they can really upgrade their awareness of issues about disabled people.

During the course of my whole day, I wander around this the House of Commons, all of the buildings, and I very rarely see anybody in a wheelchair or with any kind of disability. So I just question how we're really going to move ahead if we don't sort of have an awareness and a connection with people.

Where are the people who are disabled working in the government? How many are in policy positions, such as at the Treasury Board? Do you have a disability reference group in your department? Generally, are we making progress in terms of getting a disability lens really operating at the policy-making level, in your opinion?

Mr. Marcel Massé: I've asked if we have a breakdown of the number of people with disabilities, by occupation or by categories in the public service, because that would give you a complete answer. If we don't have it we'll try to find it and give it to you.

Basically, the proportions indicate about four persons out of 100—3.9% is the figure for 1997-98—who work in the public service have disabilities. The proportion in the overall population is that about 6.5% of people have disabilities, according to the last census. The proportion of people with disabilities in the labour force is about 4.8%. So at 3.9% we're not at the percentage we should be, as I indicated previously, but we have been moving significantly toward that proportion.

I must say I meet people in wheelchairs from time to time. The number of people I meet is about four in 100, so they're not extremely visible, because in the population itself, although they're a significant proportion, there are 6.5%.

In the executive jobs category, and that's an important indication, there are 2.9%. It is less than the 3.9% in the overall public service, but still significant. It's about half of their availability in the population in general. We'll get you the breakdown. We'll get the answer by category, occupation and so on, and give it to you.

• 1155

But if there are 2.9% in the executive category—you asked for my judgment on this—I guess it would go from 2.9% to about 5% from the top to the bottom. In the categories in which we've historically had difficulty, in terms of employment equity, this is the way it has progressed.

You see it now for women, for instance, where about 40% of our nominations are women. You still see that kind of skewed distribution over time. You saw it for francophones for a long while, although now it has been rectified and the percentages are pretty equal for the various categories, except scientific and technical.

So it is a pattern of adaptation that takes place. First we increase the percentages, then we increase the percentages through the various categories up to the top.

Ms. Wendy Lill: So when you say 2.9% are in executive positions, that's 2.9% of the 100% who are in the civil service.

Mr. Marcel Massé: Yes.

Ms. Wendy Lill: How many of these people are in positions with reference to disabilities and policy-making around disabilities? Are we having an impact in that respect?

Mr. Marcel Massé: Okay. Ms. Stanley can speak to that.

Ms. Kay Stanley (Assistant Secretary, Employment Equity Division, Treasury Board of Canada): I can speak anecdotally, Minister. In terms of the focal point for persons with disabilities at Human Resources Development Canada, there are a number of disabled persons working there. We have disabled persons working in the Treasury Board Secretariat. We have an advisory committee of federal public servants from across the country who have varying disabilities. They advise us on policies and practices.

The Public Service Commission, of course, has disabled persons who give policy advice on recruitment and retention. So they are strategically placed, but as the minister said, there could certainly be more of them. They are in a range of occupations where they can have an impact.

There's also the opposite argument that you don't want to typecast a person who has a disability into a position where they will be dealing only with other disabled persons. These people are competent, they have skills and talents, and they should be disbursed across the federal public service. That is one of our objectives in employment equity. We want to ensure that they're not channelled because of their disabilities and they are looked at on the basis of their skills and competencies.

Mr. Marcel Massé: You can see the importance of having experts with you.

Ms. Wendy Lill: I just have one more question with respect to the Youth Internship Canada program. I'm wondering what percentage of youth with disabilities are now involved in that program.

Mr. Marcel Massé: Just a second, we'll find the answer.

Ms. Wendy Lill: It must sound as if I'm a complete numbers nut, but sometimes you just want to be one.

Mr. Marcel Massé: Since its onset, 4,000 young Canadians have been hired through this program and 47 are identified as having disabilities. While this is a small number, one must remember that these jobs are mostly at minimum wage, with a maximum job rate of $15,000. Persons with disabilities often require services or equipment to permit them to participate in society. That may be a specific problem we will have to deal with. Persons with disabilities accepting employment often wind up having to pay for these goods and services themselves, resulting in a lower standard of living than they had on social assistance.

Obviously, since this program hires at the minimum wage level, it may have a special problem. I think it's an interesting point we will look at.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Okay.

The Chair: I just had a question in terms of recruitment and retention. Accommodation is also an attitudinal milieu. We saw some numbers that showed that the separation rate of some of our groups, whether it was aboriginals or persons with disabilities, was a little higher than we would like. Is that something you look at, in terms of not only the recruitment but the retention of these people, in terms of real accommodation?

• 1200

Mr. Marcel Massé: On the retention rate and our ability to continue to employ people once they've developed a disability, gone through an operation or something, or have become handicapped, I asked that question because I thought there was a pool of people or a way to increase our percentage of people with disabilities. I was told that there is now a special program we are putting into place that permits us to track people with disabilities to make sure we retain as many as we can. But I was told also that if they develop a disability—and that was one of the questions posed by the representative from the Reform Party—we continue to create incentives for them to come back into the public service to do a job that we know they can do well, notwithstanding their disabilities.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Mr. Scott.

Hon. Andy Scott (Fredericton, Lib.): Thank you. I'm advised that I lose two minutes because I have a watch.

The first thing I'll do is thank the minister. When you're responsible for failings, you don't have any difficulty taking people to task. Duty to accommodate was extremely important, and I know the vagaries of duty to accommodate make it a hard thing for a department with the kinds of responsibility Treasury Board has; it's a hard pill to swallow because it's so grey. It's hard to know exactly what it means. I know it requires a certain amount of political leadership and I know that in this instance that leadership was there. So for that I thank you. It was a very important part of the work of our task force.

I know that the legacy of governments around this file has been that there's a great deal of support, there's a great deal of study, and there's not much action relative to all of the above. That isn't to diminish Canada's international reputation or what has happened; much has. It's because of the nature of the file being so horizontal, so consequently the problem of course is mobilizing the support to actually manifest itself as outcomes.

I know how important performance and performance evaluation is to Treasury Board, and specifically to you, Minister. So it's mechanics of government that preoccupies me on this file at this moment, and I know that Treasury Board is a place where that is an important feature. I'm thinking, for instance, of Y2K, and Treasury Board is responsible for the horizontal nature of that file and making sure everybody is ready and so on.

How would you respond to the idea that, on the accountability in terms of this file, Treasury Board perform that function? The lead ministry is HRDC and they're delivering a great deal, but we've had a hard time moving the yardsticks as much as the community would like and, frankly, as much as the members of this committee would like. I don't think it's because anybody is lacking in will.

I'll just put it out there and rely on your wisdom to figure out how to answer my rather disjointed question.

The second thing is that when you're talking to Mr. Martin, as my colleague from the Bloc has suggested you might do, about the tax credits around equipment and other things that are necessary... We have tax credits and we've enhanced those tax credits as a result of the task force's work, but one issue that you might mention to the Minister of Finance, who I'm sure you're going to talk to this afternoon, is the fact that we tax some of the programs that are put in place to deal with this. For instance, the student opportunities grant, which does exactly what we talked about in terms of the youth internship program and all other kinds of programs, is it a grant that's made available to the people with disabilities? The idea is that people with disabilities should not have to pay tax on the money they spend to deal with their disability. So if that's the case, we give them a grant to deal with the disability and then we tax the grant as income.

It's a provocation in the community, but I think also it's inconsistent if you look at this as a horizontal issue and other things that we're doing. It's one that you might add on to the discussion I know you're going to have as a result of the intervention of the member from the Bloc.

Thanks.

The Chair: Thank you, Mr. Scott.

• 1205

Mr. Marcel Massé: If I may comment on the first point—I will keep your suggestion in mind for the Minister of Finance—this question of performance reports and evaluation is extremely important. In fact, it is probably the way by which improvements will continue to happen.

When we changed recently—with the help of the public accounts committee and John Williams—the system of government accounts so that there would be performance reports by the various departments, we insisted that instead of these things being just in terms of finance we get a description of the results that are expected through the spending of money. If you look at the performance reports of the departments, you will see that most of them now include something on how they deal with employment equity in general, but specifically people with disabilities. They have to report on it. They are held accountable and they have to do it in terms of results that can be quantified. That's the difference.

Every year I issue a report myself on employment equity where I have therefore to give to Parliament a quantified view of what we're doing and how we're implementing our responsibility. I think that this—which, by the way, has been happening just in the last year—has and will continue to have quite an effect on departments, because they have to quantify their performance, because they have to respond to Parliament every year on what exactly they are doing with their money in that field, and because we have the duty to monitor and we have to put out a report on this too. Then of course we monitor, we get figures, and we're called upon to answer in front of Parliament as to our performance. That I think is very important in terms of not only talking but making sure we are improving the lot of people with disabilities.

The Chair: Thank you very much.

Perhaps you could forward to the committee your comments on two issues. One was around procurement and universal design, because now that we've signed the code in terms of the web, we would love to know how we are doing on that issue as we purchase things for the public service, whether universal design is part of that decision-making process and whether we're moving that way. The other is in the service Canada, one-stop shopping, how we're actually doing there. Unfortunately, I think that when we called the office for the social union document, CPP disability, the person who answered the phone didn't know what Braille was. I would want to know how we're evaluating what we're doing in one-stop shopping.

If you could find the committee some information, that would be great. Thank you so much.

Mr. Marcel Massé: Thank you very much. My staff has prepared briefing notes and so on.

• 1210

The Chair: Minister Stewart and her officials can come forward.

Welcome, Minister Stewart and Mrs. Williams, the assistant deputy minister of the socio-economic policy and programming and program redesign sector. We've been looking forward to your appearance on a topic that's fraught with jurisdictional issues. We learned early in this file that there are no more jurisdictional issues in this country probably than aboriginals with disabilities. So welcome.

Hon. Jane Stewart (Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Lib.): You're right, Madam Chair. Let me say that I'm pleased to be here as well, not only to present you with some of the things that we are doing in the department with regard to aboriginal people with disabilities, but also to hear from you in your questions and comments about continuous improvement in this area.

What I'd like to do in the first instance is acknowledge again the 1996 report of the federal Task Force on Disability Issues, which was chaired by our colleague Andy Scott, and to say that really, as a member of Parliament myself, I worked with many members of the committee and appreciated their involvement in my own riding, and then as Minister of Revenue also, as part of the federal ministers team, in terms of the original and initial response recognizing the importance of the task force. Let me say how glad I am that the standing committee is continuing the work and the focus in this area, because clearly we still have far to go, and the progress even in my own department is not going to astound you, I have a feeling.

However, again, by keeping this issue front and foremost, I believe we will continue to make progress—and, I anticipate, more rapidly.

As I recall the report, it described in very clear language the situation facing aboriginal people. I remember the then chair and committee members talking particularly about their amazement at the complexity of the jurisdictional issues facing aboriginal people with disabilities. The report urged the government to work with provincial governments and aboriginal communities to provide flexible client-centred services and supports to aboriginal Canadians with disabilities. The task force also asked us to ensure that we made it a priority to capture the federal commitments that were identified, to assess them and evaluate them on behalf of aboriginal people with disabilities to ensure continued action and continued improvement.

As the task force pointed out, the needs and concerns of aboriginal Canadians with disabilities are even more complex than those of others. We have a long way to go to ensure that aboriginal people with disabilities are able to participate fully in the economic and social lives of their communities. As one of the many partners in the relationship with aboriginal people, I'm committed to working towards changing the situation. Without a doubt, the situation is serious for aboriginal people.

In the aboriginal peoples survey conducted in 1991, 31% of the total aboriginal population over the age of 15 reported having at least some disability. That's more than double the average Canadian rate, which, as you know, is 13%.

Now ,these data are almost a decade old and they don't tell us about aboriginal children and youth. We need updated information and we are working with Statistics Canada, HRDC, and aboriginal people to get it in the next aboriginal peoples survey in 2001. We do need more information, but as the committee knows well, we need action so that aboriginal people with disabilities can participate fully, as do all other citizens.

I understand that our colleague, the Minister of Human Resources, was here. He is the lead minister responsible for disabilities and he has shared his views. The minister discussed with you the need to bring greater coherence to federal policies and programs, to build a richer body of knowledge, to recognize and respond to the acute needs of aboriginal people with disabilities and integrate culturally appropriate solutions. He has emphasized the need for prevention and promotion of health as a way to reduce incidence of disability, and he spoke about the need for longer-term action on issues such as portability and mobility.

Without question, I support these directions. Indeed, in the area of focus here with aboriginal people with disabilities, it is absolutely imperative that we work together at the federal level as well as with other levels of government.

• 1215

I would note that the fact that HRDC continues to work with the Aboriginal Reference Group on Disability Issues is a positive thing. This is a group of extremely dedicated individuals, most of whom are persons with disabilities, who are first nations, on and off reserve, Inuit and Métis.

I also understand that you have heard from another partner of mine in this undertaking, and that's the Minister of Health. Minister Rock shared with you information about the budget health initiatives that will help first nations and Inuit people with disabilities. These include the first nations Inuit home and community care initiative, health research, and the development of a national strategy on injury prevention. In working with other government departments like HRDC and Health, it's become clear that we need a practical set of solutions to resolve issues of concern to aboriginal persons with disabilities. We need to work together and we need to work better.

It's equally clear that my department needs to do more to help first nations and Inuit people with disabilities. We're just starting to look at our programs and services through a disability lens, to evaluate whether they meet the needs of aboriginal people with disabilities. This has really all been as a result of the work of the original task force, so it has had an impact.

That being said, there are some areas where we can report progress. This year, the department has allocated $1 million for regional, tribal, or community-based initiatives aimed at providing awareness about disability issues and improving access to services. Initial funding for this initiative came through the 1991 national strategy for the integration of persons with disabilities.

Although this initiative expired in 1996, the department continues to fund disability-specific activities across the country. Those activities range from outreach programs and advocacy services to research and awareness videos. I do want to acknowledge the work of individuals involved with these initiatives who have also assumed a greater task, one of ongoing education and awareness.

Aside from funding community organizations to help with outreach and provide information on how to better access services that do exist, there are some other things that we are doing. We do provide first nations with resources so that they can provide a good education for their children. This includes support to include the special education needs of first nations children with disabilities, and indeed there are many. We need to know more about the pressures on schools that must meet the needs of these students. To that end, the department is funding a multi-year pilot project for special education in Quebec. Participating communities design projects that address special needs education in their schools. What we learn from this pilot project will help inform policy development in this area.

In addition to education, we are also working to create opportunities through the first nations and Inuit youth employment strategy. Our participation in this initiative includes provisions to accommodate many of the first nations and Inuit youth with disabilities.

Colleagues, there are a number of other things that are listed here and I'm sure you'll be able to read them. I'd like them to be recorded for the record. Perhaps as you ask me questions, I will get my cough under control and also be able to respond more specifically. Perhaps, Chair, that would be the better thing to do at this point.

The Chair: Excellent.

Mr. Ken Epp: May I make a suggestion?

The Chair: Yes.

Mr. Ken Epp: Perhaps we could have Mr. Scott read the rest of this for us to enter it into the record. That would give her a break.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: I would be pleased.

Mr. Ken Epp: That would give her a break too.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: Cynthia, would you mind?

Mr. Ken Epp: Or Cynthia Williams.

Ms. Cynthia Williams (Assistant Deputy Minister, Socio-Economic Policy and Programming and Program Re-design Sector, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development): The summer student career placement program, for example, provides a maximum contribution of $3,000 per student toward the cost of special equipment, facilities, or support that's necessary for participation, and the work experience program provides a contribution of up to $3,000 for adaptations to the workplace that may be needed to accommodate youth with disabilities.

• 1220

Another example would be in relation to the national child benefit. This is another avenue by which first nation families can meet the needs of children with disabilities. Under the national child benefit, first nations, provinces, and territories design programs and services that meet the unique needs and priorities of the families and children in their communities.

Healthy parenting programs and early child development programs that support the special needs of first nations children, including those with disabilities, are within the parameters of the national child benefit reinvestment framework.

DIAND provides funding and support for a comprehensive range of child welfare services, including prevention and protection of children from neglect and abuse and the provision of adoption and alternate care services for children in families living on reserve. On occasion, children from isolated communities require access to ongoing specialized care that is not available in their communities. In Manitoba, DIAND and Health Canada are working with the province and the AWASSIS First Nations Child and Family Services Agency to put in place a cost-shared program that would provide the services and supports necessary for these children to remain in their own homes and communities.

The department also supports an adult care program that provides in-home care—generally homemaking services—foster care, and institutional care for first nations persons who are ill, elderly, or have disabilities.

In 1997-98, total expenditures for this program were about $66 million. First nations deliver the program in their communities according to their priorities. In addition, first nations have access to aids for independent living through the non-insured health benefits program at Health Canada. There have been significant gaps in the provision of home care in first nation communities, but these gaps will be addressed in some measure with the introduction of Health Canada's first nations and Inuit home and community care program. Building upon DIAND's adult care program, this initiative will provide first nation communities with a more comprehensive range of continuing care services.

Accessible housing is a key consideration for persons with disabilities. We recognize that much more needs to be done to ensure that every first nation community has good-quality housing and that it meets the needs of their members, including those individuals with disabilities.

These examples have been provided today to share with you the kinds of practical and innovative initiatives that are being developed in partnership with first nation leadership. The Minister of Indian Affairs is committed to continuing to work with her colleagues, in particular, the Minister of Human Resources Development Canada, to respond to the needs and aspirations of aboriginal people with disabilities.

Implementation of these initiatives requires the commitment, dedication, and effort of other partners as well. In this regard, we are very optimistic. Since the launching of Gathering Strength—Canada's Aboriginal Action Plan in 1998, we've been building and strengthening partnerships that will help sustain these initiatives. We recognize that there is much more that needs to be done and we look to this committee for guidance and assistance in helping provide direction for us to that end.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: Thank you, Cynthia, and I'll just thank the committee for accommodating my momentary disability and finding an alternate way of providing the information.

I want to add that as I was reflecting on these statistics that I've been focusing on in the last short while, we do recognize that the vast majority of disabilities, at least according to the census that we have, come from accidents. So a focus that we have to bring to this is very clearly one of prevention. I think, when we look at how disabilities occur in first nations communities broadly, and when we look at accidents and preventable diseases, that's really where we can make some very important early gains in terms of the longer term.

Thank you very much. I'd be pleased to take your questions.

The Chair: I'm thrilled that you mentioned the prevention piece, because I think I was surprised in the One Voice document that there were only four lines on prevention, and it really just dealt with fetal alcohol syndrome and those kinds of prenatal...

My experience in northern Ontario in a non-status town was that accidents—and absolutely preventable accidents—were something we needed to focus on. And I think we do feel that is the mandate of this committee, that we should prevent disability, particularly those ones that just shouldn't have happened.

Thank you.

Mr. Epp.

• 1225

Mr. Ken Epp: Well, thank you, and thanks to the minister for appearing here. I know that she also is paying attention to the debate in the House today, so she has a distraction there. We appreciate her coming here.

I would also like to say—and I've told you this personally—that I think you have one of the most challenging yet interesting and demanding portfolios to handle, and often I think about the pressure that you must feel and must bear. I appreciate and support you in everything you can do to help our natives.

I have just a few questions, and the very first one happens to be along this whole area of prevention. It's also been my observation that there are a lot of things that can and should be done in concert with the native people themselves to really notch up the quality of life. I think that certainly includes, but it goes so much beyond, the nature of their housing, the appropriateness of it, and other things. I believe they need to have increased opportunities to provide and look after their families—the whole issue of jobs and their high unemployment rate. I think all of these things add to the distress that many of the natives feel, and I personally feel a considerable burden for them because of that.

I'd just like you to comment on what is being done and what is being contemplated in the whole area of improving the general quality of life of the native people.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: There are number of things, actually. Fundamentally, I think our approach and strategy have been directed by the work of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples. The response that we made—and Cynthia made reference in her comments to Gathering Strength, which was the formal response—really has challenged us as a department to step back and ask ourselves what we are doing and whether we're doing the right things.

Fundamentally, there are many things that need to change in terms of the relationship, not the least of which speaks directly to the issue that was raised in the task force, which is that the partnership has been far too direct, Mr. Epp, between first nations, for example, and the federal government. Others who have programming experience, whether it be at a level of government—provincial or municipal—or whether it be in the voluntary or the private sector, really haven't known how to participate or how to get into the relationship. It's been very secluded and set apart.

In Gathering Strength, what we're saying is that we need to work together. Interestingly enough, one of the first partnerships we celebrated between the federal government, the Assembly of First Nations, and the CNIB—down here in room 200—was just that kind of partnership that never was able to come to fruition before because people didn't know they should work together. It focused on particular eye diseases that have an increasing incidence within first nations.

Dr. Bennett, you'll know what that disease is. I can't bring it to my mind at the moment. But that's a unique partnership that never would have happened—

The Chair: Maybe it's diabetes.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: No it's not; it's a retinal...

Anyway, having said that, that's a particular example of how a change in policy and our approach has provided us an opportunity that we never expected before but is so obvious. So as a result of Gathering Strength, and recognizing that the family has to be a lot larger, I think we will find ways to help change the conditions so that it's not just sort of a funnel from the federal government saying, okay, what have you got?

Similarly, there are a number of other initiatives that come as a result of that and a focus on the programs that we do provide. Cynthia is responsible for the social programs. What we do know is we've created a welfare dependency, as had been also recognized in other parts of Canada. But we weren't dismantling that effectively. We weren't making the change from a passive program to an active program.

In so doing, as we're changing that relationship and engaging first nations more appropriately, we're looking not only at aboriginals without disabilities but at those with disabilities, and finding ways to more proactively focus on employment, training, and productive ways of participating.

• 1230

The same is true in education. As a result of Gathering Strength, there is this focus on education, and we're saying we have to understand the children we are teaching, not only from the point of view of encouraging them to remain in school—because we've had and continue to have a significant challenge in that regard—but also in terms of understanding them. And this is where you get the discussion about FAS and FAE. Can we identify those children? Do we just automatically say they're hyperactive and put them on Ritalin? Do we understand the ability and the knowledge that is out there now to help us deal more effectively and in a supportive way with these children?

You think of prevention. Certainly the programs that have been undertaken in the area of farm safety in our rural communities are the kinds of issues that we do find in many first nations communities. They're rural. People are hunting and fishing. They're out on the land, out in their 4x4s. There are programs that have been established that we need to piggyback into the communities.

That may be a long-winded answer, but I want to say to you that, really, as a result of standing back and analysing the work of a number of authorities, not the least of which was the royal commission, and too, the task force on Canadians with disabilities, we're changing the way we're working. We're bringing more partners in. And I think that will assist us in dealing more effectively with the challenges we face.

Mr. Ken Epp: Yes. I have a couple of first-hand experiences. A partner and I had a huge business at one time. It employed one person. We hired a native person, and it was very interesting to watch him because he seemed so tentative working in our little business, as if he didn't have the confidence. Of course he was a good, hard worker, he was reliable, and within a very short time he really took off on it and was a very good employee. So we were very happy with that.

I also remember that when I was instructing at the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology we had a fair number of students come in there, and it was really an extra challenge to overcome some of the prejudices that, unfortunately, they bear when they break into our end of the society.

I want to now switch a little bit and talk a bit about accountability. The amount of money that is spent in your department, when it's equated to the per capita, the number of people involved that are the ultimate recipients of it, is really very disproportionate to the amount of money that actually reaches the people. I notice that even in your speech there are several places here where you've dedicated some money. On page 2, you've allocated $1 million for community-based initiatives aimed at providing awareness about disability. And you talk about partnerships a lot. In the House, that's one of your catchphrases. It's a very nice word because it does say that we're working together.

Now, in your partnership terminology, I think you use your fellow ministers, the other departments, as they overlap with your department, and I believe you're genuine in trying to make a real partnership with the natives. I would like to know what you are actually doing to check into some accountability here. Whether you like it or not, and whether you believe it or not, I have also met very recently with a large group of what we call the grassroots natives, and they express—when they finally get the opportunity to do so, where they don't feel threatened—a lot of concern about the lack of accountability of their own leadership, and they say the money that's designated for them doesn't get to them. I think that must be true here also.

These programs are wonderful, but what accountability is there in place that makes sure that the special education needs of the children and so on, if they are disabled, actually get to them?

Mrs. Jane Stewart: This goes to the heart of the relationship. Not focusing so much on disabled aboriginal people specifically, I'd like to say two things.

With all the moneys that go from my department into first nations, there is an accountability structure. Every year first nations have to provide formal audits to the department on the moneys they have received. It's a non-biased, third-party auditor that provides the information back to us. There's a system of managing the results of those audits that allows us to look at them as being unqualified and therefore acceptable and we continue on, or, where there are qualifications, to identify where the problems are and to work with the first nation as necessary and to be clear on this.

• 1235

This is an interesting fact. If their deficit position exceeds 8% of their revenues, which is a pretty low margin, they have to work with us and others to prepare a remedial plan to deal with their issues of fiscal management. Beyond that, if we can't make progress there, we have the next step of going to a third-party manager, where someone from the outside comes in and manages the funds.

Having said that, I'd like to refer, as you have done, Mr. Epp, to what's happening in the House today.

Probably the most significant way we can improve accountability and transparency in first nations is to go back to an understanding we originally had with first nations and the fact that they need community governments just as everybody else does. This relationship where the Minister of Indian Affairs in some way, shape, or form is considered to be the person in charge and the person responsible is inappropriate. The issue of who's accountable becomes blurred and muddy.

Yesterday when I met with a colleague of yours, the member for Crowfoot, and one of his community members from one of the first nations and we were talking about the issue of accountability, we agreed that if people keep thinking the answer is outside, that it's with the minister, nothing is going to change. The great benefit of community government that clarifies who has what responsibility and who has what accountability is to add tremendously to the capacity to continuously improve the issue of accountability in first nations.

Therefore, I must confess that I do find it passing strange that your party challenges this, when what is so important to them is the issue of accountability. The best way to get accountability is to have clarity as to who is accountable.

I think this is part and parcel again of Gathering Strength. One of the four key themes is to build transparent, accountable first nations, community governments that with the money they receive can make decisions that make sense and that have modern fiscal transfers, as we have with other governments, so that they know how much money they can anticipate getting. They can use it better and more wisely and leverage it more effectively so that they can begin to deal with things that really our programs don't service at this point, which include building houses that are accessible for the disabled community members and building band offices that the disabled community can enter.

This is one of the structural changes we're undertaking as a result of Gathering Strength and as a result of rethinking our relationship. To my mind, fundamentally it is probably the most significant piece of work that will allow for change and that will deal with precisely this issue.

Mr. Ken Epp: Then—

The Chair: That's 13 minutes, sir. Time flies.

Mr. Ken Epp: If there's time, maybe I can return.

The Chair: Yes.

Madam Dalphond-Guiral.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: Madam Minister, I quite agree with what you said about the importance of self-government for Aboriginal peoples. That seems quite straightforward to me.

In your presentation, you said that three Aboriginal people in ten indicate that they have a disability. That is an alarming proportion. I was wondering if those statistics were about the same for Aboriginal people in urban areas, or if those figures essentially reflect the situation of Aboriginal people on reserves or in the territories.

[English]

Mrs. Jane Stewart: It's a good question. What we don't have is a good distinguishing set of statistics, if I'm right, Cynthia, and you can respond here. I think in the broad data we got, madam, we didn't have a distinguishment between off and on reserve.

Is that right, Cynthia?

Ms. Cynthia Williams: That's right. It's based on the aboriginal peoples survey.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: That's right. It may be helpful for us to look at those differences, and I think you make a good point.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: That seems important to me. We know that the younger the children, the more likely they are to have accidents. If there is in fact a substantial difference between groups living on reserves and those in urban areas, we can try to figure out why that is. We could then identify solutions to try to improve the quality of life of Native people.

• 1240

The present situation certainly tarnishes Canada's very good image abroad as a developed society. One of the first things that must be done is perhaps to get good data and information that is as accurate as possible. I hope that that is what you will be able to do in your next study of Aboriginal people.

We agree on that point.

[English]

I agree, it's tremendously important, and the better the data we can get, the better the programming resolutions we can find.

The Chair: Also, I think what we've learned from Statistics Canada is that it takes them about two years to really get good stakeholder input to develop the questions.

But I would want to know how many people have had to leave a reserve and move to a city in order to get the services they need. So where they happen to be right now when you're surveying them, we want to know if they had... On that theme, I think we need some sort of champion within government for the off-reserve people, because I don't think Minister Goodale is able to do this job and when it falls straight to Minister Pettigrew... I think we don't understand at all the problem of the off-reserve people. We would rather you were looking after them too. I speak for myself.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: In your presentation, you mentioned the Student Career Placement Program and the maximum contribution of $3,000 per student for adaptations to the workplace to accommodate Aboriginal youth with disabilities.

I asked another minister a question about this. I asked why the $3,000 came out of the budget. In my opinion, this should be an extra amount. If $3,000 is spent here and there, there will be fewer jobs created. If we really want to help youth with disabilities, and particularly Aboriginal youth with disabilities, this should be an additional amount on top of the programs, and not money taken out of the program budget. Maybe the way the program is set up needs to be changed.

[English]

Mrs. Jane Stewart: It's an interesting point as to whether setting aside money specifically for the disabled is the appropriate strategy or making sure that within programs there are moneys that reflect the fact that we need to accommodate all individuals. I can say that I know there's never enough money. We've invested a tremendous amount in first nation and Inuit communities, but we still see the circumstances. I suppose it's a question of debate as to whether we would be further encouraged if we earmarked money for the disabled. If your advice is that would be more appropriate, I take it under advisement.

[Translation]

Ms. Madeleine Dalphond-Guiral: Choices could definitely be encouraged. The budgets for these programs have already been cut. For example, if three of the 217 student jobs in my riding are filled by students with disabilities, should this program not receive more funding in my riding the following year? In other words, should we not encourage and recognize the efforts that have been made? That would be another way to go.

[English]

Mrs. Jane Stewart: It's really a reflection of specific realities—Cynthia, I don't know if you'd like to comment on that—but again, it gets to the heart of understanding our statistics, knowing what the requirements are and recognizing where there are increasing incidences. It would be interesting to know if there is a pattern, or if we do have broadly the same statistics, community to community. We can't answer that.

• 1245

Ms. Cynthia Williams: Unfortunately, right now we can't. But as the minister mentioned, in our discussions with Statistics Canada and thinking about data in the future, we really do want to try to fix that.

On the issue of the best way to provide support to young people in career placements, I should say that our goal was clear in our own mind. The goal was to support youth with disabilities to get employment. The route we took, the decision we took, was to identify this earmarked amount that could be used to meet their special needs. We thought that putting it in the global budget would increase the flexibility in the event that it wasn't needed for that purpose.

But I think it's an excellent suggestion, frankly, and I would really welcome the views of the committee on it. What I reiterate is that the goal is to maximize the employment of persons with disabilities, and we're interested in the best way to do that.

The Chair: Thank you.

Wendy.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Thank you.

Thank you very much for coming in. I'd just start with the question that we've asked all the ministers who have graciously come before us. It has to do with the fact that the disability community released a letter to the prime minister on March 1 saying that instead of feeling included in government policies and priorities, they feel excluded. What we are trying to find out is how that can be addressed very practically in the year to come.

I'm wondering what very significant efforts your department will make. Specifically, prior to the next year's budget, will you make a commitment to ensure that the disability-related funding is included in all of your departmental activities?

Mrs. Jane Stewart: I think it's a very good question, and in response, as I said, it's only now that we've started to look at our program through a disability lens. I give credit to my colleagues for ensuring that at least we've moved in that regard.

The one thing we don't have—Cynthia, you can correct me if I'm wrong—is a direct advisory group of aboriginal people with disabilities. There is the working group, the reference group that is working with Pierre, and we can maybe make broader connections with them. For example, we might be able to find other more direct ways of engaging an advisory group of aboriginal people to give us more pertinent advice in terms of the different aspects of disabilities that we would typically find more often in first nations communities.

Ms. Wendy Lill: That is one of the other questions we've been asking and continue to ask. How many people with disabilities are in policy positions who can have an impact on policy? You know, this disability screening happens because people with disabilities have their eyes on the situation in key positions.

Another question would be, will you provide this subcommittee with a detailed breakdown of all your portfolio expenditures on disabilities for the year 1999-2000?

Mrs. Jane Stewart: If that's your wish, I'm sure we'll have to do that. I'm not sure how easily that can be done.

Cynthia.

Ms. Cynthia Williams: We could certainly take a crack at it. In addition to some programs that are specifically earmarked for persons with disabilities—and the minister mentioned one of them—there are expenditures under almost all of the programs that reach people with disabilities, and in our program guidelines and in our discussions with first nations leadership we emphasize the need to meet the needs of that population. In turn, they emphasize to us the needs to be met in that population.

I tell you this because in some of the expenditures you can't actually identify that they were used for persons with disabilities, although in fact that's where the service reached. However, I could prepare a chart and maybe use those two categories, the direct expenditures and then some of what I might call the indirect.

Ms. Wendy Lill: All right. I have one more quick one.

Often we are only talking sort of at a principle level and policy level, and I'd like to just focus on a human being. Let's just say that right now at the zone hospital in Sioux Lookout a woman is giving birth to a child with multiple needs and she then hopes to fly back home to Big Trout Lake, or wherever. What happens then? I mean, what happens now? What happens in terms of—

• 1250

Mrs. Jane Stewart: Andy can tell us.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Let's get down to basics. What are her hopes of a normal life with her child, and what kinds of supports will be available for this child in terms of speech and physio and the whole nine yards? This has to do with what kind of accessibility we have to universal services for disabled people across this country, whether they're on a northern reserve or in a southern urban setting.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: I'll say something very generally and then, Cynthia, I'll ask you if you can comment more specifically.

Without question there are times, and probably from the point of view of the non-aboriginal population too many times, when a baby or a youth or a person with serious disabilities is not able to remain in the community at this point. We know that to be the case. As such, we have to provide for that child, if it's a particular child, off-reserve. But it happens, and my guess would be that it happens at a rate of incidence that's obviously far greater than would happen outside of the first nations population.

Cynthia, I don't know that you'd add anything to that.

Ms. Cynthia Williams: Only to share that this is a real concern for us as well, and it's a very good example of one of the things that's talked about in Mr. Scott's report in terms of the federal-provincial complexities, and even interdepartmental.

We're looking for solutions here. We have been working in the last several months in Manitoba on a related kind of circumstance, where children with complex medical needs may need to go to a provincial hospital, leave their communities to go to a provincial hospital, then spend some time en route out of the hospital but in the urban centre close to the services. Then they need special investments to support them on returning to their communities.

One thing we can do and are eager to do—the Province of Manitoba is as well, as is the first nations child and family service agency—is make it easier to provide that continuum of services so that the needs of the child are met. The objective in this case is to support getting the child back to the community as quickly as possible with the supports that are needed. It's an excellent example of an area where that kind of cooperation among all the partners holds promise for real improvement.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: In one of the other areas—not if the person we are looking at is a child but if it is an elder or an older person—there is an ever-increasing energy behind providing opportunities for elders to be in the community. Obviously this means more people with disabilities, because we know the statistics show that it's over age 55 where the percentage of people with identified disabilities is even higher than 31%. But we're starting to see that occur, and we do have adult servicing programs. Again, there's never enough money to do the job effectively, but it is a focus on recognizing the benefits of having elders in the community as opposed to a hospital.

The Chair: Just to follow up on Wendy's question, whose responsibility would it be to... Suppose there was more than one baby born with a certain disability in a Sioux Lookout zone hospital. Whose job is it to track birth defects and the kinds of disabilities in that circumstance? Is it the medical services branch of Health Canada? Who is tracking this now, within that community, as we try to move on environmental toxins and all of those things, so that when we get a cluster of births or... Do you...

Mrs. Jane Stewart: I know we don't do it. Whether medical services branch does, I don't know. I know it's not information that we capture in the department, but it's an interesting question.

The Chair: I know there's a proposal coming to Health Canada about a birth defect survey that I think there's a lot of support for, because both that and the accidents strategy seem things that would be really interesting, I think, for your department to follow up.

• 1255

Andy.

Mr. Andy Scott: As an interesting additional challenge, as if it's not complicated enough, in the case that has been mentioned, in the event that a family member chose to leave the first nation to be with the child, who perhaps has to be in another place because of the services that are available or chooses to be at another place, then the other problem to which I would like the department to always be alert is the fact that sometimes services then are denied the person.

They have to choose between the services they would get because they were on the first nation or leave the first nation and live somewhere else. It's not medical service. It's not disability-related service. It's just general services or things they would have access to if they were there but would have to give up to leave. They're forced to make choices that I don't think anyone else in the country has to make on a daily basis. That's something the department itself, independent of disability, can begin to attend to, to make sure that no one is losing things so that they can be with a family member who is somewhere else because of a disability.

But that isn't what I want to talk about.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: Carolyn's comments.

Mr. Andy Scott: We have a critical mass problem. That is the problem. This is again unrelated, perhaps, to the fact that it's aboriginal; it's just the nature of the way the community exists in this country. It's small and remote, and consequently it's more prevalent because of that critical mass problem.

Interestingly, we applied an aboriginal lens to the disability issue as against the other way around. What we found that was interesting and that required me—I don't know about anyone else—to change my thinking completely was that whereas I had spent most of the last 10 or 15 years of my life trying to convince provincial governments that this is a human rights issue, not just a service provision issue, I had to come full circle, because in this area it is a service provision issue. It's something much more fundamental. You can talk about human rights at some level, but if you can't get fundamental services, then that has to be the first priority.

As far as the federal government is concerned, because we're not in the service provision business as a rule, we have historically had a sense to view the issues more on a human rights level, citizenship level, at that level, and so therefore have offered some leadership to the country on the file. That's the reason the report called on us to continue to be involved in citizenship, and so on. But when the aboriginal lens was applied, there was a much more direct responsibility in terms of provision of service, which we need to remind ourselves all the time.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: We're not at the same starting line.

Mr. Andy Scott: Not even close.

So my first real question is this. I would be curious as to how we compare, let's say, integration and education. Pick that as one benchmark. The provinces are not comparable for the most part, but how do we compare? On the services that we provide directly, how do we compare with other jurisdictions that are trying to provide services? I would suspect not well, but I don't know that and I wouldn't make that charge.

There was another one. I welcome the reference to preventive programs and the fact that a lot of people who help bring an enormous amount of talent to these issues, as you say, were left out of it because they didn't know how to be in it. We found a great deal of that. But I would like to see how our record on direct service, delivery, education, health, and so on, compares to other people who are in the same business.

I can't allow the opportunity to pass to acknowledge the fact that the minister was the minister of another department that was part of the four-department group that put the task force together when she was Minister of National Revenue and, in fact, played an instrumental part in demonstrating the political leadership that caused the task force to be struck and has been very supportive of its efforts since.

I think I'm forgetting a question, but perhaps...

Mrs. Jane Stewart: It's an interesting one and an important one in terms of appreciation of the complexity of the governance issues, for example, in a first nation. Essentially what happens is that a chief in council is responsible for the provision of, really, all services that we would count on getting from our municipal governments, from our provincial governments, and from our federal government. It's all there in one. So it adds a dynamic and a complexity you really don't see in any other jurisdiction.

• 1300

Having said that, of course we have the responsibility to provide services. This is where my department becomes unique in the partnership. Health does health servicing, and you would have to ask them about the comparability of the direct service for health care with other provinces. We provide education and income support. With income support, we try to model what's happening in the provinces, by and large.

Similarly, with education we try to provide the same kinds of opportunities, but the reality is far different. One of the things that concerns me greatly is that in many communities now there's discussion about mould in the schools, but if you go to a first nations community, there is mould in the schools and in most of the houses. So these are challenges we face in improving the fundamental living conditions.

There's no question that living conditions are improving. The number of homes that are substandard is reducing significantly and has been reducing significantly in the last few years. But when we talk about basic infrastructure, let alone programming, we have issues.

Cynthia, you might want to comment more about that.

Ms. Cynthia Williams: On the specific issue of education, this is a real challenge for us, and we're looking to give it a lot of attention in the coming year. The minister mentioned in her remarks a pilot project in Quebec right now on special needs. It's especially to help us learn and get a better handle on the extent of the problem, the challenge, in the communities. What does that special needs population look like? What is the nature of the special need and what is the right kind of intervention and support that's needed?

We know there are differences, not just from one province to the other, in terms of the way these things are funded. We have a national funding formula, so there are differences. But we also know there are differences in the nature of the population. We know, for example, in first nation communities that many of the students with special needs in the schools are victims of fetal alcohol syndrome. That would lead us to ask, in addition to giving support to the school to meet the needs of these learners, what can we do on the prevention side jointly with Health Canada to reduce the size of that population? Similarly—it's all in aid of the same end—what can we do to reduce the size of that population by the time they get to school?

Prenatal is one stage to focus on, but so is early childhood. Here we look at tools like the head start program and what it can do to decrease the number of children who will be special needs learners if they're not helped before they get to school. So this has to be part of the way we think about what kind of support is provided by the federal government. Just incorporating it in your education formula in some respects is an admission that some of the other interventions didn't work.

Nonetheless, of course, it's an important component of the education funding formula.

Mr. Andy Scott: You invited us to speak on how we would recommend it be organized in the budget or in program delivery. It's my view that we cannot chop off the aboriginal piece, the disability piece or whatever, which is... well, around disability. I'm not going to speak to how other departments would do it with respect to aboriginal issues, because I'm not sure I would apply the same thing since there's a cost associated. That's the point I'd like to get to.

People with disabilities should have access to exactly the same programs as everybody else does. That in itself says you cannot take a piece over here and say “This is your piece.” They're Canadians; they have access to youth service programs or whatever. However, people with disabilities don't get those programs, generally because managers are trying to keep their performance numbers up.

• 1305

Let's say it's a labour market program. If you're trying to maximize the number of people you employ with $100,000, people with disabilities won't necessarily get picked. That probably applies to aboriginals without disabilities too, I don't know. But the reality is we need to set aside amounts of money that would accompany those programs to allow a manager to have $13,000 to give to someone with a disability, but only $10,000 to give to somebody who didn't.

That would compensate them, so they would take that action to deal with the cost associated with that disability. The manager needs it to make the program work. That's part of it. But the person with the disability also needs it, for the reasons that were mentioned when Mr. Massé was here. Sometimes it costs them too much to take the job because they would lose all their other benefits and they need access to those costs.

So you asked the question. I don't think it should be separate; I think it should be complementary.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: That builds on the question we had earlier.

The Chair: Thank you very much for coming. We've left the toughest for the end, I think. We know we will look forward to working with you and making sure we can just start to move on this.

Mrs. Jane Stewart: I'll look forward to the advice of the committee as well in the report that comes out of this extensive review. We'll follow up with any questions that are outstanding.

The Chair: Thank you so much.

The committee has a tiny bit of work. We've been sent the Centennial Flame Research Award as a little job for this committee. I'm going to ask Wendy Lill to read the letter from last year's winner. The report will be circulated to this committee with the qualifiers and non-qualifiers for this year's award. Then Danielle will give you the two applicants who actually qualify.

We'll send them all. There are only two who actually meet the criteria. We want you to just send some scribbled note, and then Danielle will help figure out who wins.

The Clerk of the Committee: Rate them, and then on Tuesday we can decide who is the one you feel...

The Chair: You have a tiny bit of homework for the weekend. Then we will decide on the recipient on Tuesday. Is that okay?

Ms. Wendy Lill: Shall I start?

The Chair: Yes.

Ms. Wendy Lill: Okay. I will just read the letter from the woman who got the award this year. Her name is Barbara Schober. She's not able to be here, but this is her letter:

Dear Committee members,

I would like to sincerely thank you for providing me with the opportunity to document and acknowledge the achievements of Mr. Walter Lawrence. I regret that I could not be there in person to tell you more about him.

I first met Walt eight years ago, when he came into the hospital to speak to my family and I. I was fifteen and had just become a ventilator-dependent quadriplegic after a traffic accident. We knew nothing of what to expect. I would never have imagined that such a life could be possible, nor that I would want to live it.

It has now been eight years, and I will never forget the comfort and reassurance that meeting Walt gave us. I have since then had the pleasure of getting to know Walt as a friend, and I consider it a privilege to be able to share his story with you now. Thank you.

I want to table this report by Barbara Schober. It's entitled “With each step you take, you see a little further”: The long way home of Walter Lawrence. I apologize for appearing to not know what I'm doing here, because I must admit I don't. I'm not sure if the person is Walter Schober or Walter Lawrence.

The applicants for next year will be sent to all the members. We will all have a chance to look at them and make a decision.

The Chair: Hopefully by Monday morning.

We will adjourn.