44th Parl. 1st Sess.
October 17, 2022 11:00AM
Mr. Speaker, today is the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty. Over a million Canadians right now are living in poverty. Having a disability benefit is so critically important, but the government has failed people with disabilities again and again. It is now asking people with disabilities to wait three years. It has presented a bill that does not actually tell us how much people will get or who will be included.
Can the member speak to how vital it is that people with disabilities know how much they will be receiving, who is going to be receiving this benefit and when this benefit will come?
107 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, on the points raised by the member for Victoria, I think they are essential.
Going back to Darlene, whom I mentioned in my speech, when she goes out for coffee at Tim Hortons or an ice cream and a burger at McDonald's, she has to tabulate that every single month. She lives dollar to dollar. The Bethesda Christian Association that supports Darlene lives dollar to dollar as well.
Yes, getting that critical information, like when the benefit will come into force and how much people with disabilities will be living on, is essential. I hope that information is brought forward by public servants at committee as soon as possible, because there is no point going through this legislative exercise if we do not have answers to those fundamental questions.
132 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, my aunt was actually one of the residents of Bethesda, so he may have run into her. She passed away a number of years back, but it was interesting to hear that in his speech.
One of the big concerns I have and that I hear from the disability community is around access to MAID and approval for MAID. Over and over we are hearing of people who are in distress, but not necessarily terminal, accessing MAID. I was wondering if he could address that as well.
89 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, just last year, or this year if I am mistaken, a woman in my community received MAID because she could not find adequate housing. What we need to do as a government and as a society collectively is to ensure that human dignity is respected, and we need to ensure that people living with disabilities have hope and support. I hope with this framework and with amendments at committee, we can get there and provide a new level of dignity and a new level of hope for those Canadians.
91 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to Bill C-22, an act to establish the Canada disability benefit. In short, what this legislation seeks to do is provide an income supplement to Canadians with disabilities that complements provincial programs and supports. Unfortunately, in Canada, many persons living with disabilities are stigmatized and marginalized. Many live in poverty. Indeed, those who are of working age and live with a disability are significantly more likely to live below the poverty line than those who do not live with a disability.
Persons with disabilities deserve to be supported so they can live healthy, happy, productive and meaningful lives in which barriers are removed. They deserve a helping hand to escape poverty. In that spirit, I support this bill in principle.
However, there is much that is unknown about this bill. We do not know who would be eligible for the benefit. We do not know what amount someone who is living with a disability would be entitled to receive. We do not know payment periods. We do not know how the benefit would be dealt with in terms of being indexed for inflation. We do not know what the application process would look like. We do not even know when the benefit would take effect.
Those are a lot of unknowns. After seven years and now more than a year since the government introduced a substantively similar bill on the eve of the Prime Minister's calling an unnecessary and opportunistic election, we have legislation that provides no further details. We have a minister who has been unable to shed any further light. All we have is a loose framework, with all of the details to be determined at a later date, perhaps years down the road. As a consequence, I would submit that we, as members of Parliament, are in an untenable position in some respects, being asked to support a bill the details of which are unknown in terms of the scope and impact of the Canada disability benefit.
The Minister of Employment and Workforce Development and Disability Inclusion stated in her speech that she is, quite appropriately, working with her provincial and territorial counterparts to ensure the benefit has its intended impact, that it is an income supplement and that there are not unintended consequences, including clawbacks and taxes that would undermine the effectiveness of the benefit.
While it is good that the minister is engaging in those discussions with her provincial and territorial counterparts, the issue of clawbacks for the disability community is a much broader one than simply in respect of this proposed new benefit. I certainly support providing an income supplement to low-income Canadians living with a disability, but we know the best social program is not a new benefit. The best social program is employment for those who have the opportunity and ability to work. After all, employment provides an opportunity for dignity and self-worth; it provides a sense of purpose. It provides opportunities for social connectedness, in contrast to the isolation many persons living with disabilities face each and every day.
Employment improves mental health and one's overall well-being. Not all Canadians living with disabilities are able to work, but many are and many do. Nearly one million Canadians living with a disability are in the workforce, including 300,000 Canadians who are severely disabled. Many more would like to work, but for all practical purposes, they are unable to do so. They are unable to do so because when they go out and work and earn a bit of income, their earnings are offset by the clawing back of programs and supports. We know that in some provinces, for every dollar earned, one can see a clawback of a dollar or nearly a dollar in social support. Therefore, for many Canadians living with disabilities, there is in fact a disincentive to participate in the workforce. This is counterproductive, it is unfair and it has the perverse effect of trapping Canadians living with disabilities in a cycle of poverty, which is something that this bill seeks to address.
As my colleague, the member for Perth—Wellington, stated in his speech, my friend, the leader of the official opposition and member for Carleton, introduced a bill in the 42nd Parliament, Bill C-395, to address this unfairness. In short, that bill sought to ensure that any person living with a disability would never be disadvantaged, that they would never see more in clawbacks and taxes than what they would earn in income from going out and working. Instead of supporting that bill, the Liberals voted against it.
One can debate the particulars of that particular bill, but it is not just the member for Carleton who has raised this issue. In 2017, a unanimous report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources recommended, as a key recommendation, that the federal government play a leadership role to ensure that Canadians with disabilities are not disincentivized from participating in the workforce.
In conclusion, let me say that this bill is a step in the right direction. There are a lot of details that remain and time is of the essence, but there is more work to do beyond this bill to remove barriers, so that, most importantly, Canadians living with disabilities can enjoy the same opportunities that other Canadians enjoy to be able to go out into the workforce and earn a living and have that dignity and self-worth that come with a job. That is how we reduce barriers. That is how we reduce stigmatization and marginalization, and that is how we lift Canadians living with disabilities out of the trap of poverty.
952 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to have a chance to join in this debate. It is clear that Bill C-22 is far less than what was expected. It does not provide the details and so much is left to be filled in later, yet the needs are clearly urgent. People living with disabilities in this country are disproportionately and scandalously exposed to poverty.
I totally agree that having a job is a great way to build self-worth and respect, but would my hon. colleague not agree with me that no one with a disability should live in poverty, whether they can find a job or not?
109 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I absolutely would concur with the member for Saanich—Gulf Islands that we have to do everything to ensure that Canadians living with disabilities are not trapped in poverty. We need to remove barriers so that Canadians living with disabilities can find employment, but we also have to provide other supports. This is one additional support and it is one that I support if it is ever rolled out the door, because unfortunately it could be some time between now and the time that the money is actually delivered to Canadians living with disabilities. It has, frankly, been too long.
103 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague for his speech on this International Day for the Eradication of Poverty.
Keeping people with disabilities active in the labour market, finding accommodation measures and promoting their integration also helps to address the fact that too many people with disabilities are in a vulnerable situation. That was confirmed to me by the director of Dynamique des handicapés de Granby et région, Marie-Christine Hon.
How does this fit into the discussions we need to have about accessibility? People with disabilities are not asking for much.
95 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, the question posed by the member for Shefford raises an important issue about access and taking steps to reduce barriers to help those living with disabilities.
The member for Carleton provided a concrete measure in his bill that would help persons with disabilities be able to have that opportunity to enter the workforce through free, concrete measures within that bill, namely measurement, action and enforcement. It was very disappointing that the Liberals voted against that very good bill.
80 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, inevitably, there will always be people with disabilities who cannot be gainfully employed. I hope they are not going to be ineligible because of that.
I want to ask, instead, about indigenous peoples with disabilities and others who have disabilities who live in rural and remote communities, communities that have a higher cost of living. I wonder if the member agrees that maybe there needs to be a supplement to this benefit for people who live in rural and remote communities.
82 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, what we have to do to address the cost of living is to tackle inflation, which is at a 40-year high. It is inflation that is the result of the Liberal government's out-of-control spending, propped up with the support of the NDP.
If the member is serious about reducing the cost of living and making life more affordable, that would be a good place to start.
72 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, we were talking about the lack of benefits for people with disabilities and the poverty that is often the reality for them, and the sad state where they are actually being given an option of using MAID as a terrible solution to the problem.
Could the member speak to that, and maybe to some of the reasons why we want to get behind our folks with disabilities in Canada?
71 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, it speaks to the record of the Liberal government in not listening to persons with disabilities and disabilities rights organizations when they expressed alarm at the reasonably foreseeable criterion being struck down by one judge in one decision.
We have seen heartbreaking cases now of people who have turned to MAID because of such things as a lack of adequate housing, which is something completely not what MAID was set up to do. When I asked the Prime Minister a question about that, instead of addressing the issue, and instead of showing some compassion, he said that we were wrapped up in ideology. I think that speaks to his attitude toward Canadians living with disabilities and how insensitive he is.
122 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/22 5:50:15 p.m.
- Watch
Is the House ready for the question?
Some hon. members: Question.
The Speaker: The question is on the motion.
If a member of a recognized party present in the House wishes to request a recorded division, or that the motion be adopted on division, I would invite them to rise and indicate it to the Chair.
The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.
64 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/22 5:51:27 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I request a recorded division.
7 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Pursuant to order made on Thursday, June 23, the recorded division stands deferred until Tuesday, October 18, at the expiry of the time provided for Oral Questions.
The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands on a point of order.
42 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/22 5:51:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I believe if you seek it, you will find unanimous consent to boldly travel through time to 6:45 p.m. and see the clock as such.
29 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/22 5:52:05 p.m.
- Watch
Do we have unanimous consent?
Some hon. members: Agreed.
9 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/22 5:52:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today's question relates to the number of lives that could be saved if the government would instruct the RCMP to install automated external defibrillators, also known as AEDs, in each cruiser.
I have been raising this issue since the Liberal government came to power in 2015, but the government unfortunately has taken no action. By my calculation, about 300 lives would be saved every year if AEDs were installed in Canada's 5,600 RCMP cruisers. Let me tell members how I have come to that calculation.
The purpose of an AED is to reduce fatalities from the kind of heart attack known as sudden cardiac arrest, a pathology that typically starts with what is known as pulseless ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation. An academic paper published in the Annals of Emergency Medicine makes the following remarkable assertion regarding this pathology: “Every patient with a witnessed ventricular fibrillation cardiac arrest should survive. If the patient does not survive, the goal is to determine why.”
In principle, AEDs, which are the devices used to counter this kind of cardiac issue, should save a lot of lives. How many? Well, ventricular tachycardia and ventricular fibrillation are the source of 85% of all sudden cardiac arrest deaths. Among this population, if each cardiac crisis were witnessed and responded to instantly by a first responder equipped with an AED, there would in principle be a perfect survival rate. In practice, the survival rate is going to be lower, but when the rate is at its highest, in controlled, highly monitored situations such as airports and casinos, it is impressive. At O'Hare airport in Chicago, for example, the save rate is 75%.
However, time is of the essence. According to the Heart and Stroke Foundation, for every minute the application of an AED is delayed, the chance of survival drops by about 7% to 10%. After 12 minutes, the survival rate is under 5%. This is why the public policy responsible, both here and in the U.S., is focused so intensely on speeding up response time when a victim or bystander contacts 911. This is why police vehicles are equipped with AEDs in places like Vancouver, Kingston, Laval, Fredericton, Medicine Hat and even Smiths Falls, in my riding.
There is an AED in the trunk of every one of the over 150 cruisers of the Ottawa Police Service. As long ago as 2012, this resulted in 22 interventions and nine successful saves of heart attack victims. In 2013, there were 23 interventions and eight lives were saved, and so on, in a long record of success right here in Ottawa. Ottawa's experience, which is typical, shows that on average, one life will be saved every year for every 17 AEDs installed in police cruisers. There is no better place to put an AED than in the trunk of a police car.
AEDs that are purchased in bulk cost a little over $1,000 each. Training costs are essentially zero, as RCMP personnel are already trained, and the cost of responding to 911 calls is not a factor, as the police already do this. We can multiply this success rate by the number of cruisers in the RCMP. If each one of the 5,600 RCMP cruisers carried an AED, it would result in 320 lives being saved every year. Since an AED remains operational for 10 years, we could save 3,000 lives over the next decade at a cost of $2,000 per life.
With these considerations in mind, why is it that the government has not, after seven years in power, arranged to have AEDs in every RCMP cruiser in the country?
617 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/17/22 5:56:31 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I want to begin by thanking the hon. member, not only for his advocacy but also for his donation of AEDs to his local police service.
According to Heart and Stroke, approximately 40,000 Canadians experience sudden cardiac arrest each year, and 80% of these occur outside of a hospital setting. This is one of the reasons all RCMP officers are required to be trained and recertified in CPR and first aid, including the use of AEDs. The RCMP is committed to our communities, with CPR, AED and first aid training included in the standard first aid curriculum, in which all members are required to recertify every three years. This represents a demonstrable enhancement of our public safety role as first responders.
The RCMP is aware that some police services equip police vehicles with AEDs.
I was also present when we studied Motion No. 124 at the public safety committee, looking at the hon. member for Richmond—Arthabaska's private member's bill on the issue. AEDs increase the chances of survival by 75%.
At the time of our study, the Library of Parliament provided us with a 2014 report that the public safety committee had done on the economics of policing. Municipalities pay 60% of policing in Canada, and it takes up to 50% of their budgets. While I was doing some research on police forces in North America that have these devices in their cars, it appears that many of them got them through either donations or grants, much like the hon. member across the aisle did with his police service.
Currently, the RCMP provides contract policing services to all provinces and territories except Ontario and Quebec, as well as some 150 municipalities. These services are provided through the police services agreements, which see the costs for RCMP services shared by the provincial and municipal governments and the federal government.
In consultation with the RCMP, provinces, territories and municipalities establish the level of resources, budget and policing priorities in their respective jurisdictions. It is through these consultations and decisions by the government of local jurisdiction that the RCMP is allocated funding for the purchase of new equipment.
The financial impact of procuring AEDs for RCMP vehicles would also have to be completed in consultation with contract partners to determine the extent to which these devices could be deployed. Currently, AEDs have been approved for installation and used in select RCMP operational areas, including emergency medical response teams, some protective policing details, and in provinces where provincial policing standards require that AEDs be available.
Another important consideration that came up during our study of Motion No. 124 was that only 15% of Canadians live in communities that are serviced by the RCMP. Obviously, equipping RCMP vehicles would help, but it would not reach as many communities as we would like.
In equipping RCMP vehicles with AEDs, several operational rollout and financial considerations must be assessed, including consultations with our contract partners.
495 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
