End of Mission Statement by the United Nations
Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, Ms. Catalina
Devandas-Aguilar, on her visit to Canada
In 2007 I wrote a piece critical of the
UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. I stick by my instincts. It hasn’t integrated well with Canada’s
patchwork of jurisdictions. But I
hadn’t anticipated two things:
· The rising voices of people with disabilities, who have grown tired
of second class citizenship and
· Ms. Catalina Devandas-Aguilar (CDA) who is smart, outspoken and
fearless. I’m joining her fan club.
This is quite a wonderful document. Maybe
no one noticed how devastatingly critical it is. Firm, evidence-based…Governments
ignore it at their peril. I’m thinking what she’s thinking…..Here it is
with some extra information on what needs to be done.
Gus Reed
|
Ottawa, 12 April 2019
Members of the press,
Ladies and gentlemen,
Ladies and gentlemen,
In my capacity as United Nations Special
Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities, I conclude today my
first official visit to Canada, which took place from 2 to 12 April 2019. I am
an independent expert who reports to the United Nations Human Rights Council
and the General Assembly, and advises on progress, opportunities and challenges
encountered in the implementation of the rights of persons with disabilities
worldwide.
" I would like to begin by warmly thanking " is a Costa Rican euphemism for “Hold on to your hat”
|
I would
like to begin by warmly thanking the Government of Canada for the invitation to visit the
country and assess, in a spirit of dialogue and cooperation, the level of
enjoyment of the rights of persons with disabilities, the opportunities and
existing challenges; and for the transparency, openness and excellent
cooperation extended to me prior and during the visit. I would like to express
my particular appreciation to the focal points within the Global Affairs Canada
and the Office for Disability Issues for coordinating my visit.
I would like to especially thank all the persons
with disabilities and their representative organizations with whom I met, who
shared with me their situation, concerns and desires for change, including
self-advocates with intellectual disabilities, persons with psychosocial
disabilities, women and young girls from various socio-economic backgrounds,
and indigenous persons with disabilities from across the country.
During my stay, I had discussions with numerous
senior officials representing different federal Government’s departments,
agencies, crown corporations and special operating agencies, including Global
Affairs, Justice, Employment and Social Development, Treasury Board, Health,
Women and Gender Equality, Indigenous Services, Statistics, Canada Mortgage and
Housing Corporation, Radio-Television and Telecommunications Commission,
Transportation Agency. I also had the opportunity to meet with Honorable Carla
Qualtrough, Minister of Public Services and Procurement and Accessibility, and
Senator Chantal Petitclerc, Chairperson of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs, Science, Technology. Furthermore, I met the Assembly of First
Nations, the representative body of the First Nation citizens in Canada.
At the provincial level, I met with senior
officials representing the governments of Ontario, Quebec, New Brunswick and
Nova Scotia. I also had the honour to meet with the Lieutenant Governor and the
Minister for Seniors Affairs and Accessibility of Ontario, l’Office des
personnes handicapées du Québec, the Minister of Education and Early Childhood
Development of New Brunswick and the Speaker of the House and the Minister of
Justice of Nova Scotia. In addition, I had a teleconference with senior
officials of the Ministry of Social Development and Poverty Reduction and the
Ministry of Health and Ministry of Mental Health and Addictions of British
Columbia. I also met with the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Québec
Commission des droits de la personne et des droits de la jeunesse, and the Nova Scotia Human Rights
Commission.
I
wrote to CDA before her visit. I hope she had a chance to speak of my note
with the Nova
Scotia Human Rights Commission.
Dear Ms. Aguilar,
More than four years ago, I and four other wheelchair users embarked on a campaign to be treated equally in the enforcement of food safety regulations. We were ignored, dismissed and treated as nuisances. We complained to the Nova Scotia Human Rights Commission. Again, we were ignored, dismissed and treated as nuisances. We took them to court. We won. We had a Board of Inquiry, but the Human Rights Commission was no help - they chose to adopt a neutral stance - 'watching brief' they called it. We were belittled by the Restaurant Association. Nova Scotia Environment opposed us and and treated us to bizarre interpretations of common English words like 'convenient'. Seven months ago the Board of Inquiry ruled in our favour. The Minister of Justice promised to fast-track a solution. Even though we had suggested a solution in the summer of 2016, we have never been contacted. Nothing has happened. Nothing. We asked the Human Rights Commission to remind government of the decision. We pointed out that the Human Rights Commission can impose penalties. We did not receive a response. It's becoming clear that nothing will happen. Apparently, the government doesn't care that some restaurants are health hazards. They are unwilling to enforce their own regulations. The Human Rights Commission ruling is being ignored. The Human Rights Commission isn't interested in following through on this ground-breaking decision. The Food Safety Division of Environment Nova Scotia isn't interested in food safety. The Restaurant Association is contemptuous of us and unfamiliar with basic hygiene. The Chief Medical Officer of Health is silent. Seven months later. Nothing.
At considerable effort and personal cost, we have exhausted all
available avenues. Please help us assert the
fundamental right to health. You can find a complete timeline
of our four-year Odyssey here.
|
I visited the Centre for Addiction and Mental
Health (CAMH) in Toronto, the Integrated University Health and Social
Services Center (CIUSSS) of Center-Sud-de-l'Île in Montreal, the Nashwaaksis
Middle School in Fredericton, and the unit for persons with psychosocial and
intellectual disabilities called “Emerald Hall” at the Nova Scotia Hospital in
Halifax.
I am pleased to present some of my preliminary
observations and recommendations, which I will elaborate in more detail in a
report to be present at the 43rd session of the UN Human Rights Council in
March 2020. These preliminary observations neither reflect all the issues
presented to me, nor all the initiatives undertaken by the federal, provincial
and territorial governments of Canada in the area of disability.
Legal and policy framework
Interpretive
Declaration:
To
the extent Article 12 may be interpreted as requiring the elimination of all
substitute decision-making arrangements, Canada reserves the right to continue
their use in appropriate circumstances and subject to appropriate and
effective safeguards.
|
At the international level, Canada has ratified
the Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities (CRPD) and its
Optional Protocol, the “Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published
Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print
Disabled”, as well as the core international human rights treaties, with the
exception of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of
All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, the Convention of the
Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearance, the Optional Protocol to
the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment
or Punishment, and the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on
Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. I would like to encourage the country to
ratify all these international human rights instruments as well as to consider withdrawing its interpretative
declaration on article 12(4) of the CRPD.
At Constitutional level, the Canadian Charter of
Rights and Freedoms of 1982 guarantees in its section 15 the right to equality
and non-discrimination on a non-exhaustive list of prohibited grounds, which
includes disability.
Due to Canada’s federal structure, competencies
are divided among federal, provincial and territorial governments. Therefore,
various federal, provincial and territorial laws regulate the rights of persons
with disabilities.
The federal legislative framework considers the
rights of persons with disabilities under various laws, including the Criminal
Code and Canada Evidence Act, the Canada Elections Act, the Employment Equity
Act, the Health Act, the Pension Plan Act, the Income Tax Act, the Disability
Savings Act, the Student Loans and Student Financial Assistance Acts, the Air
Transportation Regulations, and the Broadcasting Act. However, up to today
there is no specific legislation at federal level on the rights of persons with
disabilities and the existing legislation does not cover the entire spectrum of
rights contained in the CRPD, nor it is fully compliant with it.
At the provincial level, only Ontario, Manitoba,
Nova Scotia and Quebec have enacted disability specific legislation, none of
which is comprehensive nor fully in line with the CRPD. In addition, other
pieces of provincial and territorial legislation fail to reflect a disability
rights-based approach; for example, all legislation on legal capacity
contradicts article 12 of the CRPD, which recognizes without exceptions the
legal capacity of all persons with disabilities on equal basis with others.
In general, Canada has yet to undertake a
comprehensive review process to harmonize all its legislation with the CRPD. I
would like to remind that governments at all levels are responsible for the
implementation of the CRPD. Article 4 (5) provides that obligations undertaken
by States Parties to the CRPD shall extend to all parts of federal States without
any limitations or exceptions. I strongly encourage the relevant legislative
authorities at the federal, provincial and territorial levels to undertake a
comprehensive legislative review and complete the process of incorporation of
the treaty, including the legal harmonization, in accordance with article 4 of
the CRPD.
I welcome the introduction of Bill C-81 known as
“Accessible Canada Act”, which aims at achieving a barrier-free Canada,
currently under consideration in the Senate. I was informed of the ongoing
consultations and engagement with First Nations governments to clarify how the
Bill might apply within its jurisdictions. I would like to encourage all
authorities involved to guarantee the enjoyment of all indigenous persons with
disabilities of their rights without the risk of assimilation and in the
shortest possible timeframe. Sufficient resources should be allocated to secure
the success of this process.
I also noted that there is no national policy in
Canada to coordinate and guide the implementation of the CRPD at the national,
federal, provincial or territory levels. The implementation of the Sustainable
Development Goals (SDG) at domestic level provides an opportunity to include
the rights of persons with disabilities in national development policies and
plans. In that context, I welcome Canada’s commitment to support the
implementation of the 2030 Agenda on Sustainable Development domestically and
internationally. I would like to highlight that efforts to achieve the SDGs
should always consider the rights of persons with disabilities in a
crosscutting matter and in line with the CRPD, to ensure that no one is left
behind.
Implementation and monitoring of the CRPD
The Office for Disability Issues (ODI) is the
federal focal point on disability, as provided for by article 33(1) of the
Convention. This Office works to build capacity, knowledge and foster coherent
disability-related programmes across the government of Canada. Each province
and territorial government have a similar office responsible for policy advice
and expertise on disability issues within their jurisdiction.
However, Canada lacks a mechanism to coordinate
and harmonize the initiatives carried out at the federal, provincial and
territorial levels by these different focal points. Nor are there sufficient
efforts to coordinate the responses at provincial/territorial levels. This lack
of coordination mechanisms is one critical element that limits the
mainstreaming and implementation of the CRPD across Canada.
Canada is also yet to appoint an independent
monitoring mechanism as required by article 33 (2) of the Convention to
promote, protect and monitor its implementation. In this regard, I noticed with
appreciation that Bill C-81 proposes the designation of the Canadian Human
Rights Commission as the independent body responsible for monitoring the
Government of Canada’s implementation of the CRPD. I urge the Government to
provide the appropriate financial and human resources required to the Canadian
Human Rights Commission to implement this mandate at the federal, provincial
and territorial levels.
In addition, I would like to encourage each
province and territory to also designate independent monitoring mechanisms in
line with article 33(2) of the Convention in their respective areas of
jurisdiction.
Both
the province and Dalhousie University take a census of employees through a
self-identification process fraught with perverse incentives and subtle
judgements. There are only two
dimensions to the reports, which are unreasonably optimistic and not useable
“to
inform the design, implementation and monitoring of policies and programmes.”
|
Data collection
One in five Canadians (i.e. some 6.2 million
people) is a person with disabilities. Statistics Canada has strong
socio-demographic data and statistics on this population. The Canadian Survey
on Disability is the main source of data on disabilities for those aged 15
years and above. Despite this data, I remain concerned about the limited
information available on persons living in institutions and the lack of data on
the situation of indigenous persons with disabilities living on reserves.
I welcome Canada’s ability to disaggregate data
on disability from existing surveys, such as household income and health
surveys, through the use of the Canadian Disability Screening Questions (DSQ)
and the short set of questions on disability formulated by the Washington Group
on Disability Statistics. These are important steps to monitor the
implementation of the CRPD and the SDGs in an international comparable manner.
However,
I have noted with concern that the statistical and administrative information
available is not being used to inform the design, implementation and monitoring
of policies and programmes.
General considerations on the current disability
framework and response
The federal government expressed its vision to
make Canada accessible and inclusive of persons with disabilities. Over the
last years, the government has promoted or enhanced various disability-related
initiatives, including Bill C-81, a new Strategy for an Accessible Government,
improvements to the Canadian Disability Saving Program, and the Enabling
Accessibility Fund, amongst others.
Nevertheless, during my visit I have noticed that
discussions about the rights of persons with disabilities are still framed in
terms of social assistance, rather than from a human rights-based approach.
While the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms enshrines the right to
non-discrimination, and federal, provincial and territorial human rights laws
recognise a duty to accommodate, which allows for individual remedies, this is
insufficient to ensure a systemic transformation of society.
I would like to remind the authorities that the
CRPD embraces a substantive model of equality, which goes beyond
non-discriminatory approaches towards the full inclusion and participation of
persons with disabilities. Therefore, more proactive governmental responses are
needed to ensure systemic change and take away from individuals the burden of
initiating lengthy and onerous legal procedures to achieve the recognition and
enjoyment of their rights.
I have also noted significant disparities in the
areas of accessibility and access to education, health, administration of
justice, and social protection depending on where a person with disabilities
lives in Canada. As the availability and quality of services varies
considerably from one place to another, this restricts the freedom of movement
of persons with disabilities in the country. The situation of indigenous
persons with disabilities is particularly worrisome, as they are far behind in
the enjoyment of their rights, and they do not have access to the same services
and opportunities, many of which are only provided outside the reserves and in
non-cultural sensitive ways.
There is an urgent need for high-level leadership
at the federal, provincial and territorial levels to guide and guarantee an
effective and coordinated implementation of the rights of persons with
disabilities across Canada.
Accessibility to the physical environment,
information and communications
During my visit, I have observed that public and
private infrastructures, as
well as the public transport systems, are still not fully accessible to
persons with disabilities, with some variations between provinces. While some
provinces and territories have passed legislation in this regard,
implementation and enforcement remain insufficient.
|
Gerry Post has been very thorough and creative
in his review of this "service". He has identified
substantial savings and improvements. Yet we continue to operate this
expensive and ineffective program. Saving a couple of million dollars
and improving service doesn't require further deliberation.
|
The introduction of Bill C-81, known as the
Accessible Canada Act, is an important step to foster accessibility within
areas under federal jurisdiction, including the use of public procurement as a
tool to ensure sure that goods and services federally purchased are accessible
for persons with disabilities. However, I note with concern the absence of
baselines indicating the current status of accessibility in Canada and any
progress made in the removal of barriers.
With regard to access to information and
communication, I was pleased to learn about efforts made by the Canadian
Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission with regard to making
broadcasting services accessible through closed captioning and audio
description in English and French. I also welcome the decision of this
Commission to establish an obligation for carriers to provide relay service. On
the use of sign language, I am concerned that both the American and Quebec Sign
Languages are not officially recognized in Canada, and that the provision of sign
language interpretation services remains very limited, including to access
basic services.
Education
Education in Canada falls under the jurisdiction
of the provinces and territories.
the average student with a hearing
loss graduates from high school with reading comprehension skills at about
the fourth-grade level.
|
Significant differences in practice are seen
across the country. I was extremely pleased to learn about the fully inclusive
education system implemented in New Brunswick, which is one of the best in the
world and a role model, where all children with disabilities attend regular
schools and receive individualized support, irrespective of the level of their
support needs, under a framework of universal design for learning. The New
Brunswick government has also implemented a child and youth-centered Integrated
Services Delivery framework, which involves a multidisciplinary and coordinated
response across agencies to support children and youth with disabilities.
However, I am concerned that most provincial and
territorial policies are yet to implement fully inclusive education systems and
that students with disabilities in other parts of Canada may receive
considerably different levels of support. I was informed that many children
with disabilities are still being taught in segregated classrooms or in special
education schools, and I received worrisome reports that children with
disabilities can be put on partial school days or temporarily removed from
school, for periods of up to six months without access to education.
I also noted a disconnection between the State’s
commitment to inclusion in legislation and policies, and everyday
implementation in practice, reflected in long waiting time and lack of services
for students with disabilities and their families, putting them under
significant emotional and financial pressure. I was also informed that children
with disabilities in segregated classes or those that have followed some kind
of individualized education plan may receive a different certification or
diploma than other children, which limits their opportunities for enrolling in
education at higher levels.
Legal capacity
In Canada, persons with intellectual and
psychosocial disabilities are systematically denied their legal capacity
through substitute decision-making regimes, such as guardianship and
curatorship, reportedly for their own protection. For example, in Ontario there
are approximately 20,800 adults under different forms of guardianship, whereas
in Quebec there are about 34,000 adults under guardianship or curatorship. In reality, far from being
protected, persons with disabilities placed under these measures are deprived
of their equal recognition before the law and other rights, and are at a
higher risk of abuse and institutionalization.
But a professor at Dalhousie
University
is taking issue with some aspects of the new law. Archie Kaiser says while
it's an obvious improvement, it also "dramatically falls short"
when it comes to promoting inclusion and equality.
His chief concern is the lack of
concrete supports for adults.
"I don't understand why
supports have been so, on the one hand ... tantalizingly mentioned, but never
really endorsed within the legislation. So that's a big problem with
it," said Kaiser, who teaches law and psychiatry.
Kaiser is also concerned about
orders that were under the old law that are being grandfathered in,
"which I don't understand at all," he said.
He wants all orders to be
reopened to determine whether they comply with the new legislation.
|
There are successful experiences of supported
decision-making in Canada, such as those in British Columbia, geared to enable
persons with disabilities to exercise choice and control over their own lives.
While some of these practices have existed for many years, the lack of an
enabling legal framework limits their impact and their possibility to scale
them up.
Against this background, I would like to urge all
provinces and territories to initiate comprehensive legal review processes of
their legal systems to enable the full implementation of the right to legal
capacity of persons with disabilities, on equal basis with others. It is also important
to provide financial and technical assistance to civil society organizations
that can support the implementation of supported decision-making initiatives.
Recalling Canada’s fundamental contribution to
the notion of supported decision-making in the drafting process of the CRPD,
working together with self-advocates with disabilities, as well as some of its
long-standing practices of supported decision-making, I would like to reiterate
my recommendation to withdraw Canada’s reservation to article 12(4) of the CRPD
and speed up the process to eliminate all forms of substitute decision-making
across the country.
Access to justice
There is a duty to accommodate persons with
disabilities’ needs in all proceedings before federal courts and tribunals
based on the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code. Different
provinces and territories also recognize this obligation in their respective
legislations. Moreover, I was informed of the efforts of the Canadian Judicial
Council to develop
training courses and guidelines on access to justice of
“If I am speaking from a
position of privilege and am ‘un-woke,’ then so be it.”
Acting as a one-man Human Rights
Commission board of inquiry, Halifax Lawyer Walter Thompson ruled Monday the province discriminated
against three Nova Scotians with intellectual disabilities by housing them in
a locked, fenced unit of the Nova Scotia Psychiatric Hospital known as
Emerald Hall when they qualified for humane community placements.
|
persons
with disabilities.
I would like to remind the federal, provincial
and territorial governments that the obligation to provide procedural
accommodation to persons with disabilities in all legal proceeding, as
established in article 13 of the CRPD, is distinct from the obligation to
provide reasonable accommodation, as the first is not subjected to the test of
undue hardship.
In addition, I am very concerned about the
overrepresentation of persons with disabilities, particularly those belonging
to indigenous or other minority communities, in both prisons and the juvenile
justice system. I have also received alarming information that persons with
psychosocial disabilities are diverted to mental health courts for minor
offences where they are subjected to higher penalties and stricter regimes.
… one should not be glib
about what witness Wendy Lill described as the elephant in the room during
the Roadmap discussions of services for the disabled - cost.
Walter
Thompson, QC
So,
oft in theologic wars
The disputants, I ween, Rail on in utter ignorance Of what each other mean; And prate about an Elephant Not one of them has seen!
John
Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887)
I'm no economist, but I have expectations that government,
having read their own Human Rights Act, will take steps to ensure that
every individual in the Province is afforded an equal opportunity to enjoy a
full and productive life. Government has no higher calling.
They have an obligation to examine the elephant from every angle.
|
Deprivation of liberty and involuntary treatment
Provincial and territorial legislation across
Canada provides for the involuntary hospitalization and treatment of persons
with psychosocial disabilities, in contradiction to article 14 and 25 of the
CRPD. For example, the Mental Health Act of British Columbia contains very
broad criteria for involuntary admissions and, once detained, a person can be
forcibly treated without their free and informed consent, including forced
medication and electroconvulsive therapy.
In addition, most jurisdictions have passed
legislation permitting clinician-initiated community treatment orders, which
compels persons with psychosocial disabilities to comply with a treatment plan
that generally includes medication and counselling. I have received several
complaints regarding the implementation of these orders, including the absence
of procedural guarantees, the lack of alternative treatment options and threats
of forced hospitalization.
I have been informed that the rates of
involuntary admissions and community treatment orders are increasing across
Canada. Similarly, the number of inpatient beds in psychiatric hospitals,
particularly in forensic units, is also increasing. In addition, different
interlocutors told me that there is a significant number of persons with
psychosocial disabilities who no longer need to be in the hospital but cannot
leave due to the lack of
community-based alternatives.
I urge the provincial and territorial governments
to transform their mental health systems to ensure a rights-based approach and
well-funded community-based responses, ensuring that all health care
interventions are provided on the basis of free and informed consent.
I have also noticed that there is a lack of
independent monitoring of mental health facilities and institutions. I would like
to recommend the provincial and territorial governments to establish
independent monitoring mechanisms for centers of deprivation of liberty,
including hospitals and institutions.
Living independently in the community
I am extremely concerned about the lack of
comprehensive responses to guarantee the access of persons with disabilities to
the support they need to live independently in their communities. Whereas
legislation, services and programmes vary across provinces and territories,
generally access to support is not considered as a right, but rather as a
social assistance programme dependent on the availability of services.
Moreover, many support services and programmes
are run by non-profit organizations, with limited funding and guidance from the
provincial and territorial governments. Consequently, persons with disabilities
have limited access to different forms of support (including income support,
home support, and respite centers), experiencing long waiting time up to
several years. While some pilot projects have shown their potential to
transform service provision (e.g., the initiatives to provide personalized
direct funding), the overall identification, systematization and scaling-up of
such initiatives remain a challenge.
We
must allow people with disabilities to participate in the economic life of
the province. Problems such as affordable housing, transportation, and
end of life care should be made better by encouraging savings and
ownership. CEDIFs may be the vehicle.
|
According to Statistics Canada, around 509,000
persons with a health-related condition reside in hospitals, nursing homes,
group homes and other long-term facilities. While the majority of larger
disability-specific institutions have been closed, the absence of
community-based options gives no other alternatives to persons with
disabilities than living in institutions and other residential settings where
they end up being segregated and isolated from their communities, thus denying
their choice of and control over living and support arrangements, and
significantly restricting their day-to-day decisions.
Furthermore, I have been informed that persons
with disabilities, particularly those with intellectual and psychosocial
disabilities, are significantly overrepresented among the homeless population.
This rate keeps increasing due to poverty and the lack of community-based
services, including adequate and supported housing.
In this regard, I urge the federal, provincial
and territorial governments to adopt concrete action plans to prevent the
re-institutionalization of persons with disabilities and to ensure the
provision of community-based services, including adequate housing. The
provision of support to persons with disabilities is not only a human rights
obligation of Canada, but also an essential condition to ensure that no one is
left behind in the implementation of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.
Right to life
I am extremely concerned about the implementation
of the legislation on medical assistance in dying from a disability
perspective. I have been informed that there is no protocol in place to
demonstrate that persons with disabilities have been provided with viable
alternatives when eligible for assistive dying. I have further received
worrisome claims about persons with disabilities in institutions being
pressured to seek medical assistance in dying, and practitioners not formally
reporting cases involving persons with disabilities. I urge the federal
government to investigate these complaints and put into place adequate
safeguards to ensure that persons with disabilities do not request assistive
dying simply because of the absence of community-based alternatives and
palliative care.
Employment and social protection
The 2013 report Choice, Equality and
Good Lives in Inclusive Communities submitted to the Department of Community Services
says: "the Services for People with Disabilities program currently funds
thirty Adult Service Centres (ASCs). These service providers deliver a
system of vocational services largely through segregated, sheltered day
programs and represent the predominant response to the employment needs
of people with disabilities".
Adult Service Centres do not pay minimum wage, nor do
workers even benefit from the sale of goods they make.
Whatever the arrangement, those people are better off in the workplace you say. Some have high needs and the employer can provide supervision and other services. That may be, but it shouldn't be necessary to bend the rules to help people. Pay the minimum wage, account for supervision and services. Show us the math.
Ps the six-year-old report, if enacted, is just what CDA
envisions
|
According to official data from Statistics
Canada, 41 per cent of persons with disabilities are unemployed or out of the
labor market. This rate is 20 per cent higher than for persons without
disabilities, and those actually employed earn less than Canadians without
disabilities. Within the federal government, persons with disabilities
represent only 5.6 percent of all public servants, occupy less
managerial positions, and experience lower rates
of promotion.
I welcome the initiative of the federal
government, as Canada’s largest employer, to improve the recruitment, retention
and promotion of persons with disabilities. Similar efforts are necessary at
the provincial and territorial levels to increase the employment of persons
with disabilities in the public sector.
In relation to social protection, I am deeply
concerned by the high rate of poverty among persons with disabilities. While
the federal, provincial and territorial governments offer a variety of
benefits, including income assistance and tax credits, for persons with
disabilities and their families, I have been informed that social protection
disparities between provinces and territories are significant, and that access
to some of these benefits is difficult due to strict eligibility criteria and
cumbersome procedures. Moreover, the existence of different overlapping
benefits and programmes makes it difficult for some people with disabilities to
navigate the system. Canada needs to review its social protection system to
ensure rights-based responses that promote the active citizenship, social
inclusion and community participation of persons with disabilities.
Participation of persons with disabilities
In relation to participation in decision-making
processes, I was pleased to learn that, in general, the authorities consult
with persons with disabilities and their representative organizations. For
instance, I have learned about extensive consultations on Bill C-81. However,
organizations of persons with disabilities express the need to transition from
simply consulting with them towards actively involving them in all decisions
that affect them directly or indirectly. Similarly, the authorities are
encouraged to make additional efforts to ensure the participation of the
diversity of persons with disabilities in decision-making processes, including
women and children with disabilities, as well as those belonging to indigenous
and racial communities.
I was also informed that the federal government
supports organizations of persons with disabilities through the Social
Development Partnerships Program, which provides 11 million Canadian dollars in
annual funding for projects intended to improve the participation and inclusion
of persons with disabilities. This financial support has not increased over the
years and is provided throughout a competitive process that forces national
organizations of persons with disabilities to compete among themselves.
I would like to encourage the federal government
to review this funding mechanism in order to create an enabling environment for
the establishment and functioning of representative organizations of persons
with disabilities.
International cooperation
In line with article 32 of the CRPD, Global
Affairs Canada should be accessible to and inclusive of persons with
disabilities. I would like to encourage the federal government to ensure that
disability inclusion is considered in all Canada’s international assistance
efforts as a cross-cutting conditionality.
Closing
As
a highly-developed nation, Canada still lags behind in the implementation of
its obligations under the Convention on the Rights of Persons with
Disabilities. There are significant shortcomings in the way the federal,
provincial and territorial governments of Canada respect, protect and fulfill
the rights of persons with disabilities. Notwithstanding, the country has
the potential to undertake a major transformation and fully embrace the human
rights based approach to disability introduced by the Convention. The various
pilot initiatives and good practices in place could, if adequately scaled up,
promote systemic change for persons with disabilities in Canada.
The commitment of Canada to the implementation of
the SDGs represents a great opportunity for the implementation of the rights of
persons with disabilities, provided that all policy responses at federal,
provincial and territorial level are framed in light of the high standards of
the CRPD.
Let me conclude by reiterating that I am very
grateful to the Government of Canada for inviting me to visit the country.
Acknowledging the principles and values of equality, respect of diversity, and
fairness – for which Canada is well known internationally – it is my hope
that those value also guide all the State’s responses vis-à-vis the rights of
persons with disabilities.
No comments:
Post a Comment