44th Parl. 1st Sess.
April 30, 2024 10:00AM
- Apr/30/24 11:00:02 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I have much to say about the budget. I am going to focus on one area, the issue around lifting people out of poverty, more particularly for people with disabilities.
I am absolutely disappointed with the budget. For people with disabilities, the budget includes only a $6-a-day level of support. That is what the disability benefit amounts to. It would not lift people with disabilities out of poverty; it would make them marginally less poor.
Meanwhile, the government does not take on big corporations and put forward an excess windfall tax so that it could take those resources and ensure that the people who are most vulnerable in our community are supported.
Will the member tell his own government to step up for people with disabilities and make sure that they are indeed lifted out of poverty, and not just with the $6-a-day support in budget 2024?
153 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 12:17:29 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, here we are, on the eve of the Day of Mourning. Every year, we honour those who have died or been injured at work. I want to give a shout-out to United Steelworkers in Port Alberni, which hosted Sunday's event in my riding, as well as to the others from labour who hosted in communities in Courtenay and Parksville.
As we honour those workers, it is critical that we support workers who are injured. We know that if workers who have been injured in the workplace do not return to work within 12 months, they have a 1% chance of ever returning to work. Right now there are 1.2 million Canadian workers who are not working. We need to unlock their potential and support them by accommodating them when they are injured at work, to get them back to work immediately.
We have a historic program for returning to work through Pacific Coast University, a disability management program that the government started, but the government did not renew it. Is the government going to renew the disability management program with Pacific Coast University, or is it going to abandon workers?
195 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 12:18:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, as I mentioned in my speech, budget 2024 is proposing a new Canada disability benefit to supplement provincial and territorial benefits in order to increase the financial well-being of over 600,000 working-age persons with disabilities. This is just the start. We will continue to put more programs in place so we can help workers in this situation, as well as people with disabilities, so that they too can have an equitable chance at life in Canada in their future.
84 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 1:20:56 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the Liberals promised that their disability benefit would end poverty for people living with disabilities. We have heard my good friend, the member for Port Moody—Coquitlam, advocate very hard for the disability community.
As New Democrats, we were expecting a disability benefit that would actually lift people out of poverty. Instead, what they are offered is $200. That is $6 a day. It is not even a bus pass in many areas.
Could my colleague maybe explain to people living with disabilities why they could not even offer a disability benefit that would meet the poverty line in our country, to ensure that people living with disabilities could at least have a $2,000 minimum income a month to try to make ends meet?
128 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 1:21:50 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to assure the hon. member that I am an avid advocate for the disability benefit.
Having worked somewhat in this field, though, I am painfully aware that just putting in a benefit at the federal level will not solve the problem. We need to work closely with the provinces and with the other plans that are in place. The worst thing we can do is put in a federal benefit and then have provinces and other private plans withdraw their support.
I am confident that, with this new plan, it is a great start and it is a great day for the disability community.
108 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 3:05:55 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, people with disabilities across the country disproportionately live in poverty. As a result of their advocacy, the government committed to a Canada disability benefit back in 2021.
After years of advocacy, what has been proposed in budget 2024 is nothing that the disability community has called for. No one called for 200 bucks a month. Using the disability tax credit, no one called for that. Waiting until July 2025, no one called for that.
Could the minister share who actually asked for what is in the proposed Canada disability benefit?
92 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 3:06:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Canada disability benefit is a major milestone in our unwavering commitment to creating a more inclusive and fairer Canada. Through budget 2024, we have committed over $6 billion as an initial investment for the Canada disability benefit. This is the first-ever federal benefit designed for persons with disabilities.
We recognize that there is more to do and we will be working alongside provinces and territories to first make sure that there are no clawbacks for persons with disabilities.
This is the next step in the journey for the Canada disability benefit, not the destination.
98 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 3:22:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I am sure the member has heard from constituents who are upset about the paltry Canada disability benefit included in this budget. It is not just the amount; it is the process by which the government arrived at that amount. I will read what the National Disability Network noted: “These specific programmatic details were announced without consultation of the disability community and do not align with the principle of 'nothing about us, without us.'”
Does my colleague not agree that the Canada disability benefit should have been a higher amount to actually lift people out of poverty and, more importantly, that the amount should have been arrived at in consultation with the people who are most affected?
121 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 3:23:20 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, to my colleague and friend from my old hometown of Prince Rupert in Skeena—Bulkley Valley, I will be very personal on this front. We have a little nephew, Ethan, who has a rare genetic condition. Probably one out of five or six individuals in Canada has this condition. I know full well the amount of expenses that my brother and sister-in-law incur for their son. It is not just in the thousands of dollars; it is literally, in the last couple of years, in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. I know what they face, so I do appreciate the sentiment coming from my colleague.
I will say that the Canada disability benefit does move the needle, and we will continue to work, also in conjunction with the disability tax credit, which is in place ensuring that disabled Canadians have the support they need to live a dignified life and to lead a life where they can fulfill their capacity in terms of what God has given them.
I want to give a shout-out, a prayer and a big hug to my little nephew.
191 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 3:38:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, tomorrow is the beginning of MS Awareness Month. Yesterday, I met some advocates for MS. One of the advocates has MS. She told me that her sister also had MS. The two of them have MS, but only one of them qualifies for the disability tax credit. One lives in a rural part of Canada and the other lives in an urban area. The sister who lives in the urban area got the credit while the rural sister did not.
There are many inequities in the health care system and we know that the Canada disability benefit, hidden behind the disability tax credit, is inaccessible as well as being inequitable.
I wonder if the member could commit that the government will remove this inaccessible and inequitable barrier in the Canada disability benefit.
134 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 3:55:51 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member for Kelowna—Lake Country made some really important remarks to the minister at the human resources committee yesterday, pointing out the extent to which folks with disabilities are living in legislated poverty. I appreciate that she made those comments.
If there is a Conservative government one day in the future and the Canada disability benefit was in place at a level that would lift folks with disabilities out of poverty, in that situation, is that a benefit that would remain in place over time?
89 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the hon. member was at committee yesterday and asked some really good questions of the government and asked for documents. I look forward to those documents coming to the committee.
Conservatives on this side supported the disability benefit from the very beginning. We did not do anything to withhold the legislation. In fact, we did as much as we could to expedite it when it was debated at committee. It was Bill C-22 and we supported it right from the very beginning.
85 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 4:25:35 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I listened to the member's speech with great care, and I appreciate her concern for members of the community. I wonder whether she shares my concern that the level set in the budget for people with disabilities of a $200-a-month benefit is far too low and that it should be perhaps doubled, at least, before we proceed with the budget. We proposed this disability benefit almost four years ago, during the pandemic. At the time, we anticipated it would be set at a level to lift all people with disabilities out of poverty, and certainly the current rate would not do that.
107 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 4:26:09 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, this is an important matter. I am speaking with the disability community and have met with members. We need to do more. This $6 billion is the first step, but I agree we need to do more. We need to work with the provinces and territories to ensure they do not reduce their disability benefit. These new measures will continue to do more. We also need to work with provinces and territories, and the existing programs also need to be strengthened. I thank the member for his advocacy.
90 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I want to ask my fellow British Columbian about the Canadian disability benefit he talked about.
First of all, Bill C-22, which was the enabling legislation, simply delegated to the minister responsible, so the minister could introduce regulations that would define who was considered disabled, who would be eligible and for what amounts. Here we are, and the government is now saying it up to $200. It is not even a guarantee of $200. Does the member think we, as parliamentarians, did our job in accepting, basically at surface value, that the government was going to help persons with disabilities with this benefit?
For people who are on the Canadian pension plan disability, often times they are at a lower rate on that particular program than they would be, for example, in British Columbia, on social assistance. To me, it would make sense to at least help those individuals first, instead of telegraphing it to everyone. People had such high expectations and have only come to find out that persons with disabilities feel left out completely by this particular budget.
183 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/30/24 5:13:48 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, the member makes some good points. His first question was whether we did our job in essentially giving the minister responsible carte blanche to determine the amount. I think there are reasons the amount of the benefit was not codified in the legislation.
Where the government has let us down is that the minister did not consult with the disability groups that are so important in this whole equation. If the government would have consulted on the actual amount, if it would have looked at what is required to lift people out of poverty, the benefit would have been a higher amount.
The member's second question is about prioritizing funding to those who need it most. I think, regardless of whether we are talking about CPP, disability or people on social assistance, the reality is that folks need what they need to get by and cover their basic costs. We need to ensure that this benefit, for everyone who is living with a disability and who needs it, is raised to a level where they are able to cover the basic cost of living. There are many details in ascertaining what those levels are, but the key thing is the outcome, which is whether people getting what is required to lead a decent life.
217 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to amend the Employment Insurance Act to introduce a new type of special benefits: an attachment benefit of 15 weeks for adoptive parents and parents of children conceived through surrogacy. It also amends the Canada Labour Code to extend parental leave accordingly. Passing Bill C‑318 would be a small step in the right direction. The Bloc Québécois has been calling for this for many years. We have been saying that employment insurance must be reformed as soon as possible to improve accessibility for taxpayers, review the eligibility criteria, formulas and funding, and optimize service delivery.
Government leadership on EI as a whole has been lacking. We need more leadership on this issue. In 2021, the Liberals campaigned on a promise to modernize EI. They promised to expand the program to cover self-employed workers and address gaps made obvious during the COVID‑19 pandemic. After the last federal election, the Prime Minister gave the then minister of employment, workforce development and disability inclusion a mandate letter instructing her to bring forward and begin implementing a plan to modernize the EI system by summer 2022. It is fair to say that the Liberal government missed that deadline, since it is now 2024.
The Liberals say they are committed to modernizing the system, but their communicative action is clearly lacking. The government is not walking the talk. Since I spoke at second reading, the bill has changed somewhat, with two amendments adopted. I will not read them, but the Bloc Québécois voted in favour of these two amendments because they broaden the scope of the bill. The categories I mentioned earlier were initially not included in the scope of the bill, but I believe they are in the spirit of respecting indigenous traditions and knowledge and, more broadly, in the spirit of reconciliation.
The arrival of a child is a complex and challenging time for the whole family, all the more so when the child is adopted or conceived through surrogacy. The bond created with the child is an important part of parenthood. Again, in the case of adoption or surrogacy, the process of forming attachments can be tricky because there is no biological connection to the parents, which is why it is important to pass this bill.
We know that international adoptions are becoming less frequent and that children adopted by Canadian or Quebec families are often older than in the past or have special needs. As a result, we can be sympathetic to the desire of these new parents to receive a special benefit to foster attachment.
Another important thing about Bill C-318 is that it provides for an extension when the child is hospitalized. Given that the hospitalization of a child is an emotionally difficult ordeal, this extension seems necessary, especially if we take into account the emotional factors that are added when a child is adopted or born through surrogacy. The extension would be equivalent to the number of weeks the child receives care in a health care facility.
We also know that the attachment process is complex and time-consuming, particularly for adopted children, and that it is part of an equation that also involves the so-called “normal” needs of a baby or toddler. That is why it is a good idea to create this new benefit. John Bowlby's attachment theory states that, from birth, children turn to adults for protection. If the adult adequately meets the basic needs of the child, an attachment relationship that is necessary for the development of the child's psyche will form between them.
I remember relating a bit of my story during second reading stage, but I would like to remind the House that I myself was adopted at the age of two months. Since I was not receiving any affection at the orphanage, I was wasting away. For seven years, my adoptive parents tried in vain to have a biological child before finally deciding to turn to adoption. They chose me. How lucky I was. They gave me the chance to be loved, coddled, reassured, protected and educated, and to become the person I am today. They took care of me and I will be grateful to them for the rest of my life.
Currently, in the adoption process, the long-awaited arrival of a new child is a very emotional time for the parents. The meeting often takes place in a context of lengthy travel, time differences, fatigue, and changes in culture and climate.
However, the children do not experience the same feelings of anticipation as the new parents. Naturally, they may mourn the loss of familiar people and places and be frightened by people who are often of a different ethnicity and who do not speak their mother tongue. It is an emotional transition. There are, however, several things that can help relieve the pressure on everyone involved in the process.
As we know, in Canada, the EI program provides 17 weeks of maternity leave for pregnant women, which can begin at any time during the period starting 13 weeks before the expected date of birth and ending 17 weeks after the actual date of birth. The Canadian program also provides up to 63 weeks of parental leave for biological and adoptive parents.
If both parents work for federally regulated employers, they can share their parental leave, entitling them to an additional eight weeks of leave. Parents who share parental leave are entitled to 71 weeks of leave. They can take this leave at any time during the 78-week period that starts on the day of the child's birth or on the day the child comes into their care. The code contains no provision for paid parental leave.
Let us compare that to how it works in Quebec. In the case of a birth, parental leave can begin the week of the child's birth. It is in addition to the 18 weeks of maternity leave or the five weeks of paternity leave. In the case of an adoption, each adoptive parent is also entitled to 65 weeks of parental leave. The leave may begin no earlier than the week the child is entrusted to the adoptive parents or when the parents leave their work to travel outside Quebec to pick up their child. The leave ends a maximum of 78 weeks after that.
In a same-sex couple, both parents are entitled to parental leave if the child's relationship to his or her mothers or fathers was established in the birth certificate or adoption judgment. At the parent's request, the parental leave can be suspended, divided or extended if required by the parent's or child's health. In other situations, at the parent's request and with the employer's consent, the leave can be divided into weeks.
Up until December 2020, Quebec's parental insurance plan did not offer the same benefits to all workers. Adoptive parents had 18 fewer weeks to spend with their children. Eventually, the tide turned following a battle waged by the Association des parents adoptants du Québec, which represents adoptive parents in Quebec.
Bill 51, which was passed on October 27, 2020, and assented to on October 29, gave equitable treatment to adoptive parents as of December 1, 2020, through the creation of welcome and support benefits, as well as adoption benefits for the second parent. All in all, this means adoptive parents are entitled to the same duration and level of income replacement as biological parents. For the time being, neither the Canadian nor the Quebec plans provide for any attachment benefits such as those proposed in this bill. It is therefore important to pass Bill C-318 to fill this gap.
1316 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
