Replies to Lists of Issues - CESCR - Canada

Reply to List of Issues : Canada. 20/07/2001.

Responses to the Supplementary Questions Emitted by the
United Nations Committee on Economic, Social
and Cultural Rights (E/C.12/Q/CAN/1)
on Canada's third report on the International Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (E/1994/104/Add17)

November 1998

I. FEDERAL RESPONSES

International treaties in Canada are not self-executing and therefore, an international treaty cannot alone form the basis of an action in domestic courts. (1) However, where domestic laws are passed subsequent to and expressly in light of a ratified international treaty, jurisprudence states that courts must strive to interpret such laws in accordance with the relevant international obligations. However, if the express provisions of a domestic statute are contrary to or inconsistent with Canada's international obligations, the former prevail. (2) Where international treaty obligations are assumed on the basis that existing domestic laws, policies and practices already conform to the international provisions, the Supreme Court of Canada has yet to identify the appropriate analytical framework. Nevertheless, a review of Canadian jurisprudence demonstrates that courts often refer to human rights treaties to underscore the importance of a provision of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, (3) or in the context of non-constitutional litigation, the validity of existing legislation. (4) Often cited is the statement by the former head of the Supreme Court of Canada, Chief Justice Dickson in Reference Re Public Service Employee Relations Act (Alta.): (5) The general principles of constitutional interpretation require that these international obligations be a relevant and persuasive factor in Charter interpretation. ... I believe that the Charter should generally be presumed to provide protection at least as great as that afforded by similar provisions in international human rights documents which Canada has ratified. (at p. 349) In short, though I do not believe the judiciary is bound by the norms of international law in interpreting the Charter, these norms provide a relevant and persuasive source for interpretation of the provisions of the Charter, especially when they arise out of Canada's international obligations under human rights conventions." (pages 349-50) The approach developed by Canadian courts reflects the balancing of a number of constitutional constraints and legal principles. Firstly, as indicated above, international law is not self-executing in Canada. Additionally, according to case law (6), authority to make international commitments falls solely within the federal domain. However, constitutionally, neither the federal government nor the ratified treaty, can compel the provinces to legislate to implement the treaty in areas that otherwise fall within provincial jurisdiction. Finally, treaty-making in Canada is an executive act, derived from the Royal Prerogative. Hence, Parliamentary approval is not required for Canada to enter into an international agreement. In light of these factors - particularly the fact that ratification does not go through the debates and scrutiny typically inherent in the Parliamentary process - the courts have concluded that in the event of a conflict between an international treaty and domestic law, the Parliamentary process should prevail over Executive action. As a final point, it should be noted that regardless of a court decision, Canada continues to be bound to fulfil its treaty obligations.

2. With respect to paragraph 10 of its Report, are governments in Canada able to plead cases under the Charter in a manner that is consistent with Canada's obligations under the Covenant?

It is both possible and important for governments in Canada to consider treaty obligations in the development of arguments before the courts. As mentioned above, the Supreme Court of Canada has indicated that the principles of constitutional interpretation require that international obligations be a relevant and persuasive factor in Charter interpretation.

3. What is the opinion of the federal, provincial and municipal governments as to the effect of current and proposed trade and investment agreements such as NAFTA, FTAA and the MAI on their ability to fulfill obligations under the Covenant and what processes have been put in place to review these questions?

Whenever Canada undertakes to enter into an international trade or investment agreement, the terms of such agreement are reviewed for their consistency with Canada's domestic legislation. This is true, too, in respect of Canada's participation in other international agreements. Canada recognizes and seeks to promote the complementarity between economic growth through trade liberalization and the protection and promotion of human rights, good governance and other social values of Canadians. For example, Canada recently played a leading role in the recent successful adoption of the ILO Declaration on fundamental principles and rights at work.

4. Please provide details as to how the government responded in cases where plaintiffs invoked their rights under the Covenant to interpret Charter rights and provide any information about cases in which the government or the Court interpreted the Charter in light of the Covenant.

Refer to Disk #1 and 2, attached, for the text of cases in which the Covenant was raised.

2. animal1.wpd - International Fund for Animal Welfare Inc. v. Canada (Ministry of Fisheries and Oceans), [1989] 1 F.C. 335.

3. PSAC.wpd - Public Service Alliance of Canada v. Canada (Treasury Board), [1984] 2 F.C. 562.

4. dolphin.wpd - Dolphin Delivery Ltd. v. R.W.D.S.U., local 580 (1984), 10 D.L.R. (4th) 198 (B.C. C.A.).

5. service.wpd - Re Service Employees' International Union, local 204 v. Broadway Manor Nursing Home (1983), 4 D.L.R. (4th) 231.

8. gaumond.wpd - Gaumond et Commission des droits de la personne du Québec c. Société de transport de la communauté urbaine de Montréal, [1996] R.J.Q. 2036.

10. animal2.wpd - International Fund for Animal Welfare Inc. v. Canada (A.-G.) (1998), 157 D.L.R. (4th) 561.

12. clark.wpd - Re Clark et al. and Peterborough Utilities Commission et al. (1995), 24 O.R. (3d) 7.

Disk 2

2. educatn.wpd - Reference Re Education Act (Ontario) (1984), 10 D.L.R. (4th) 491.

3. chiasson.wpd - Chiasson et Commission des droits de la personne du Québec c. centre d'accueil Villa-Plaisance (1995), [1996] R.J.Q. 511.

5. maksteel.wp - Commission des droits de la personne du Québec et droits de la jeunesse c. Maksteel Québec Inc., [1997] R.J.Q. 2891.

6. lambert.wp - Lambert c. Québec (Ministère de Tourisme) (1996), [1997] R.J.Q. 726.

7. varchol.wp - Varchol et Commission des droits de la personne du Québec c. Brzozowski, [1994] R.J.Q. 1447.

8. leroux.wp - Leroux et Commission des droits de la personne du Québec c. J.M.Brouillette Inc. (1994), [1995] 25 C.H.R.R. D/495; J.T.D.P.Q. no.16 (QL).

9. stjean.wp - Commission des droits de la personne du Québec c. St.Jean-sur-Richelieu (commission scolaire), [1994] R.J.Q. 1227.

10. kafe.wp - Kafé et Commission des droits de la personne du Québec c. Commission scolaire Deux-Montagnes, [1993] R.J.Q. 1297.

11. dufour.wp - Dufour c. Centre hospitalier St-Joseph de la Malbaie, [1992] R.J.Q. 825.

12. gilbert.wp - Gilbert et Commission des droits de la personne du Québec c. Ianiro, [1996] J.T.D.P.Q. no.13 (QL).

13. jeunes.wp - M.L. et Commission des droits de la personne du Québec et droits de la jeunesse du Québec c. Maison des jeunes, [1998] J.T.D.P.Q. no.22 (Q.L.).

Please include information about: Masse v. Attorney General of Ontario, Clark v. Peterborough Utilities Commission, Falkiner v. Attorney General of Ontario, and Gosselin c. Québec.

Disk 3

5. Does the government agree that repealing protective legislation without replacing it would be inconsistent with article 2 of the Covenant? Provide details as to how governments have dealt with this issue under the Charter, and explain what the government's position was in Ferrel v. Attorney General of Ontario and Dunmore v. Ontario.

Canada interprets article 2 (based on the wording of the article itself and General Comment 3) as obliging it to take steps "with a view to achieving progressively the full realization of the rights recognized" in the Covenant. Retrogressive measures are only justified after careful consideration of the totality of the rights provided for in the Covenant and in the context of the full use of the maximum available resources.

It is difficult to discern what is implied by "protective legislation" in this question. Various non-governmental organisations have criticised changes to the method by which federal and provincial governments now share the costs of various social welfare programs. It is the government's position that the Committee's focus should be on whether the substantive entitlements under the Covenant are being met by governments in Canada, and not on the internal means by which such entitlements are being funded when those means fall within an appropriate range of government responses.

6. Explain the position of the federal and provincial governments in Eldridge v. Attorney General of British Columbia with respect to the Charter's protection of the rights of people with disabilities, referring specially to General Comment No.5.

The Government of Canada was an Intervenor in the case of Eldridge v. Attorney General of British Columbia. [1997] 3 S.C.R. 624. The position of the Government of Canada was the following: while the failure of the Respondent province to include medical interpreting services for deaf patients as a benefit under the Medicare Protection Act was prima facie contrary to section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, the infringement was demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society pursuant to s.1 of the Charter.

The objective of the Medicare Protection Act was to ensure reasonable access to medical care by maintaining a fiscally sustainable health care system. This important objective was jeopardized by shrinking fiscal resources and therefore an infringement of a Charter right was justifiable. Limiting coverage for services under the Medicare Protection Act did not detract from the overall objective of the legislation, and rather ensured that available funds were used in a manner which government had determined to be a reasonable balancing of competing social demands.

The Supreme Court of Canada reached a contrary conclusion on the appropriate balance of cost and other factors in this case. Finding the Charter infringement not justified under section 1, the Court did state that "while financial consideration alone may not justify Charter infringements, governments must be afforded wide latitude to determine the proper distribution of resources in society."

The Government of Canada supports the Committee's General Comment No. 5. Under section 15 of the Charter and section 3 of the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA), the Government of Canada has ensured that persons with disabilities are guaranteed protection against discrimination. Public and private sector employers also have a duty to accommodate persons with disabilities. The Employment Equity Act further provides that private and public sector employers shall prepare employment equity plans to identify and eliminate employment barriers against persons with disabilities and institute such positive policies and practices and make such reasonable accommodations as will ensure that persons with disabilities achieve a degree of representation in each occupational group in the employer's workforce that reflects their representation in the Canadian workforce.

In 1998, the Government of Canada amended the Criminal Code, the Canada Evidence Act and Canadian Human Rights Act to strengthen the human rights protections for persons with disabilities and to improve their access to the justice system. For example, the CHRA was amended to add an explicit duty to accommodate. Amendments to the Canada Evidence Act provided for communications assistance for persons who have special communications needs. In addition, alternative methods of identifying the accused, such as auditory and tactile recognition have been made available. Amendments to the Criminal Code ensure that persons with disabilities are not excluded from jury service because of disability if they are capable of serving with assistance. Also, persons with physical or mental disabilities can now provide testimony through videotape. Finally, a new offence of sexual exploitation against persons with disabilities was established.

On March 10, 1998, Cabinet endorsed a proposal to develop a federal government disability strategy in support of the general policy framework contained in In Unison: a Canadian Approach to Disability Issues. As a result, an Interdepartmental Committee on Disability Issues, under the leadership of Human Resources and Development Canada, is working on the development of this strategy. (Please refer to the response to Question 27 for more information on the In Unison strategy)

8. Will the Government of Canada be acting on the recommendations of the Canadian Human Rights Commission that the ambit of human rights protections in Canada be expanded to include social and economic rights?

The Government of Canada will consider this recommendation as part of its comprehensive review of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which is scheduled to commence shortly. It is inappropriate to make any commitment to amend the legislation without such analysis as well as without consulting with other organizations and interested citizens.

9. Please provide the Committee with information from each Human Rights Commission in Canada about cases in which the Covenant has been used in interpreting or applying human rights legislation.

In Canada, Human Rights Commissions are independent of government. Questions pertaining to federal, provincial and territorial human rights commissions have been forwarded to these for separate response to the Committee.

10. Please provide an estimate of the percentage of human rights complaints filed with each Human Rights Commission in Canada which are adjudicated and explain how this is consistent with the Commission's General Comment No. 3, para. 5.

12. What is the Federal Government's and each provincial government's position with respect to whether "workfare" programs discriminate against welfare recipients and are contrary to article 2 of the Covenant? Please explain the Government of Quebec's position in the Lambert case.

As any "work for welfare" schemes fall within provincial and territorial jurisdictions, this question will be left to provinces and territories for response. See also Question 24.

14. What is the position of each Human Rights Commission (with the exception of Quebec's) on whether "social condition" should be added as a prohibited ground of discrimination in the light of article 2 of the Covenant, and what is the position of the provincial and federal governments on this question?

The federal government believes that persons in poverty should receive legislative protection but that the precise wording of the ground could have unforeseen consequences and warrants further analysis and consultations. It, too, warrants consideration as part of the comprehensive review of the Canadian Human Rights Act which is to commence shortly.

15. Please state whether children of non-nationals of Canada seeking to stay in Canada are denied access to social services and benefits, education or medical care which children of Canadians have access to.

Children of landed immigrants have the same rights of access to social services and benefits, education and medical care as children of Canadians. For children of refugee claimants, although eligibility for these services normally depends on the status of their claim and the right to lawfully remain in Canada, provinces have usually made these services available.

16. Please indicate whether as a result of the repeal of the Canada Assistance Plan Act (CAP) by Bill C-76, people deprived of basic necessities under provincial or territorial social assistance schemes no longer have any legal recourse in federal law under the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST).

Under the Canada Assistance Plan (from 1966 to 1996, followed by a phase-out period), provinces and territories were required, as a condition of federal cost sharing, to establish an appeal system in their social assistance legislation for people who feel deprived of basic necessities under social assistance programs. The CAP cost-sharing condition reflected the rule of natural justice, i.e., that Canadians are guaranteed an inherent right to a fair hearing.

As of the Summer of 1998, every provincial and territorial government still has an appeal system in place. Principles of natural justice, as reflected in the common law and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, would prevail even in the absence of any formal appeals process. This Charter guarantees certain sets of rights with respect to life, liberty and security of the person (Section 7) and equality (Section 15). In accordance with Section 24 of the Charter, anyone whose rights or freedoms have been infringed or denied may apply to a court of competent jurisdiction on those grounds.

The CHST took effect on April 1, 1996. It encompassed the transfers provided under the block funded Established Programs Financing for health and post-secondary education, and the cost-shared transfer for social assistance and services previously provided under the Canada Assistance Plan. Under cost-sharing, CAP had become cumbersome to administer and failed to provide provincial governments with the flexibility to tailor provincial programs to meet the needs of their own residents, reflecting their unique circumstances. The CHST does require that provincial governments respect the principles of the Canada Health Act and prohibits the imposition of residency requirements for social assistance eligibility purposes. It should be kept in mind that under the Canadian Constitution social assistance programs fall under provincial jurisdiction.

17. Why were the standards and entitlements maintained in health care but not in social assistance?

Both the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) and the Canada Health Act (CHA) contain essential criteria governing eligibility for federal funding, which are in fact not 'standards and entitlements' as the question suggests, but rather administrative requirements to be met. More complex administrative and accounting practices were required under CAP - where funding was 50:50 cost sharing - compared to the administrative principles, such as portability, in health care where federal funding is via a block fund.

Under the CHST, social programs were included in the block funding mechanisms of federal contributions, and hence, the complex administration and accounting practices of CAP were no longer necessary. This was done so that provinces and territories would have greater flexibility in the design and delivery of these programs which under the Canadian Constitution fall under provincial jurisdiction..

The federal government is working together with the provincial governments to develop, through mutual consent, a set of shared principles and objectives to underlie social programs in Canada. Federal, provincial and territorial governments are currently working towards the conclusion of a framework agreement.

Although the CHST block fund applies to both the health and social programs designed and delivered by the provinces, those programs are distinctly different: health benefits are provided to 100% of a province's residents - including emergency services to those residents while outside the province – whereas social assistance goes to a small group of persons in the province who are found to be in need.

Notwithstanding these differences, whether under CAP or the CHST, certain basic elements of health and social programs have always been in the domain of provinces. For example, provinces have always determined who is a person in need, the rate of social assistance, and what welfare services they will make available. Similar determinations are made in the health care area by provinces deciding, with their doctors, what qualifies as an insured service.

The commitment to assist people in need throughout Canada is still the same, however, even though the administrative situation has changed. This is demonstrated by the high priority assigned, for example, to initiatives for persons with disabilities by the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Ministers responsible for Social Services. Similarly, the federal and provincial governments have joined their efforts to reduce the incidence and depth of poverty among Canadian children, and succeeded in establishing the National Child Benefit.

18. Have provinces responded by cutting social assistance rates or entitlements? Please provide information from each province about changes which have occurred from April 1995 to the present day, and any effect on the extent or depth of poverty.

19. To what extent does the revoking of CAP represent a retreat from the idea of financial assistance when in need as a universal entitlement, as described in previous reports to the Committee?

In Canada, social assistance is still defined under the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST) as "aid in any form to or in respect of a person in need".

Under the CHST, the provinces have increased flexibility to innovate and improve their social programs so that they can better address the needs of people in their jurisdictions.

The block-funding transfer now allows them to introduce preventive or holistic (health, social and education) approaches which better respond on a continuous basis to the changing needs of their communities. The needs test applied by each of the provinces to determine eligibility for assistance is still essentially the same. Benefits are still provided to all permanent residents found to be in need and therefore meet the same universality criteria.

20. With respect to the negotiations by the Ministerial Council on Social Policy Reform and Renewal mentioned in paragraph 86 of the Report, are the federal and provincial governments committed to restoring legal enforceability of the right to adequate financial assistance?

The federal government is working together with the provincial governments to develop, through mutual consent, the set of shared principles and objectives to underlie social programs in Canada. Federal, provincial and territorial governments are currently working towards the conclusion of a framework agreement. During these negotiations, all Canadian governments remain committed to the social well-being of their citizens.

As was the Canada Assistance Program (CAP), the CHST is a fiscal transfer mechanism and not a legislative vehicle to ensure the right to adequate financial assistance.

21. Describe any monitoring procedures established by governments as well as non-governmental agencies to measure the effect of the 40% ($6 billion) cut in the amount of cash transferred by the Federal Government for social assistance, health and post-secondary education between April 1995 and the end of fiscal year 1999-2000. What common effects have become evident throughout Canada?

Provincial-territorial economic and fiscal situations are continuously monitored throughout the year. Meetings of federal and provincial finance officials are held on a regular basis to share financial and economic data and to review respective programs and policies. Provincial data is incorporated into the structure of the federal-provincial fiscal transfer programs.

The Canadian government provides financial assistance to provincial governments for their health, post-secondary education and social assistance programs. This assistance is provided by way of fiscal transfer payments under the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST). The CHST is provided in the form of a cash transfer and a tax point transfer. In determining the total amount of the CHST entitlement, the tax point transfer is sometimes overlooked, but it is an integral part of the CHST; to focus only on the cash component is misleading and inaccurate.

The CHST, which equalled almost $29 billion in 1993-94 was reduced to $26 billion in 1998-99 – a reduction of $3 billion. This time period is usually chosen for comparison purposes as it encompasses the period just before expenditure restraint measures took effect and just after. While these reductions are substantial, they are half the $6 billion figure sometimes quoted – the $6 billion figure does not include the CHST tax point transfer. In addition, the CHST provided stable and predictable funding for provincial governments through a legislative five-year arrangement (1998-99 to 2002-03).

Program expenditure reduction measures were critical in order to regain control over the finances of the Canadian government and to ensure the future financial viability of Canada's social programs. Failure to do so would have put these very programs in jeopardy. For example, in 1993-94 total federal spending reached $158 billion while total revenue was only $116 billion. Furthermore, about $40 billion was being spent just for interest on the federal debt -- money that could have been available to finance social programs for Canadians. As cash transfers to provinces alone made up over 20 per cent of the federal governments total program expenditures, they could not be spared from expenditure restraint. However, transfers to provinces were reduced by less than other program spending. Between 1993-94 and 1998-99 major transfers to provinces declined by 7.4 per cent while direct program spending declined by 10.8 per cent. (The 7.4 per cent figure includes unconditional transfer payments provided to provinces under the Equalization program which provinces can use for their social programs and transfers to territories under Territorial Formula Financing.)

Once federal fiscal stability was re-established the first major spending initiative undertaken by the Canadian government was to increase transfers to provinces in support of health, post-secondary education and social assistance programs. Legislation was passed in the summer of 1998 raising the cash floor placed under the CHST to ensure that the CHST cash transfer component does not fall below $12.5 billion in any year. This one measure translates into an additional $7 billion for provinces for social programs over six years (1998-99 to 2002-03). The CHST is scheduled to grow by 2.5 per cent annually, climbing from $26 billion in 1998-99 to $28.5 billion in 2002-03.

22. Did the previous cost-sharing of all social assistance costs and specific social programmes for vulnerable groups mean that in times of greater need or in regions of greater needs the Federal Government contributed more? Please provide information on the types of services which are no longer cost-shared equally, report on any reductions in those services since 1995 and provide information about the effects of any changes on vulnerable groups.

Under the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP), federal contributions were tied to provincial and territorial expenditures on social assistance programs and social services, from 1966 until 1996. Where a provincial or territorial government's social program costs increased - either because of economic downturns or program enhancements - federal contributions increased to cover 50% of new approved costs. However, due to the inherent nature of cost sharing, federal support for social programs was unequal across provinces; richer provinces could finance enhanced programs for their own residents and therefore could receive a greater share of federal funding.

In April 1996, the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST) incorporated the block-funding that previously had existed for health and post-secondary education with a new block fund that incorporated the funding that had been through CAP. Because the CHST is a block fund, there are in fact no specific services that are cost-shared equally. Rather, each province and territory decides according to its own priorities how it will spend its CHST allocation.

Most jurisdictions have undergone program reviews in the mid-1990s in an effort to streamline and rationalize their operations. Reductions in federal transfers resulting from the implementation of the CHST were only one of the factors affecting provincial and territorial spending on social services during this period. Other factors that contributed to service restructuring were the nation-wide push to (or towards) balanced budgets, the economic downturn of the early- to mid-1990s and governments' efforts to reduce or eliminate overlap and duplication of efforts in the delivery of social programs.

23. Does the Government intend to implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples with respect to self-determination, self-governance, and control of lands and resources and the establishment of a lands and treaties tribunal?

The federal government has had policies in place for many years that are congruent with, or accommodate, many of the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP.) The comprehensive claims policy addresses the use and management of renewable resources and provides for negotiating economic benefits. Canada and Aboriginal groups are working together to address policy issues such as options to achieve certainty without extinguishment of Aboriginal rights and considering the development of forward looking treaty processes and relationships. The federal government has recognized the inherent right of self-government as an existing right under the Canadian Constitution. Also before the RCAP final report, Canada made a statement at the United Nations indicating its willing to accept a right of self-determination for indigenous peoples which respects the political, constitutional and territorial integrity of democratic states.

In January 1998, the federal government released Gathering Strength: Canada's Aboriginal Action Plan. The Action Plan responds to the Royal Commission and sets directions for a new course based on: recognizing past mistakes and injustices; reconciliation, healing and renewal; and building a joint plan for the future. At its heart is a commitment to address the needs of communities by building a real partnership with Aboriginal people, including the development of mechanisms to recognize sustainable and accountable Aboriginal governments and institutions. It has four objectives:

- renewing the partnerships to bring about meaningful and lasting change in our relationships with Aboriginal people;

- strengthening Aboriginal governance is about supporting Aboriginal people in their efforts to create effective and accountable governments, affirming treaty relationships and negotiating fair solutions to land claims;

- developing a new fiscal relationship means arriving at financial arrangements with Aboriginal governments and organizations which are stable, predictable, and accountable and help foster self-reliance;

- supporting strong communities, people and economies focusses on improving health and public safety, investing in people, and strengthening Aboriginal economic development.

The federal government is prepared to consider other recommendations of RCAP, such as enacting companion treaty legislation and the establishment of an independent claims body for specific claims. This is being worked on by government and First Nations. Other recommendations, such as the establishment of a Crown treaty office and treaty commission, will require development and assessment of their feasibility over the next years.

24. Please provide information on any provinces that require participation in "workfare" or similar programmes and describe the appeal procedures in place with respect to any disentitlement from basic necessities on this ground. Are these programmes applied to single parents and, if so, what exceptions apply? Is the Committee correct to assume that these programmes would have been illegal under CAP?

The term "workfare" is often used inappropriately as a synonym for traditional short-term job creation. Strictly speaking, classic workfare is defined by two conditions: (1) participation must be mandatory rather than voluntary, and (2) work or other approved activity must be done in exchange for the basic welfare payment, rather than for a supplement to that basic payment.

As of the summer of 1998, with the exception of one province, there is no formal workfare program in Canada. See provincial and territorial sections for further details.

The Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) prohibited provinces from imposing a mandatory work requirement in exchange for basic assistance. However, provinces could set reasonable requirements respecting "work availability" (job search, acceptance of suitable work) and "employment preparation" (participation in employability enhancement programs) as a condition of eligibility for employable applicants and clients.

The same flexibility exists under programs that are block-funded under the Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST). When clients fail to fulfil their employability requirements, all provincial and territorial governments can terminate, suspend or reduce a client's benefits or refuse an applicant's request for assistance; these requirements are sometimes waived because of poor labour market conditions or significant barriers to employment.

26. Will the Government implement the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples to address the unacceptable levels of unemployment both on and off reserves?

The Government agrees with the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples (RCAP) that unemployment levels on and off-reserve are unacceptably high, and shares the RCAP focus on building economic self-reliance and community well-being through capacity building, and Aboriginal peoples' increased access to land, resources and opportunity.

Two federal departments are working with Aboriginal peoples to improve employment levels. Human Resources Development Canada (HRDC) works with all Aboriginal peoples -- First Nations, Inuit and Metis -- on and off-reserve. The Department of Indian and Northern Affairs (DIAND) works with First Nations people on-reserve and Inuit.

In response to the RCAP call for a long-term employment strategy for Aboriginal peoples, HRDC will launch the Aboriginal Human Resource Development Strategy on April 1, 1999. This five-year initiative, a key employment component of Gathering Strength, the government response to RCAP, responds to the need for skill development and employment initiatives for Aboriginal peoples, and for integrated delivery of initiatives.

The Strategy builds on current HRDC policy, which transfers control over design and delivery of employment programming, along with accountability for results, to local Aboriginal authorities. The results of increased local responsibility and resources are clear. About 27,000 Aboriginal people have completed labour market interventions and half of those persons are working. The other half are in further training, have returned to school or are looking for work. Successful local control of employment initiatives also supports Aboriginal peoples' aspirations for self-government, and their desire for full labour market participation.

In April, the Strategy will expand local responsibility to include programming for Aboriginal people with disabilities, urban Aboriginal peoples and youth as well as to include child care for working parents or those in training or school. This will improve client access to services. HRDC will also support efforts to expand the capacity of Aboriginal partners to design and deliver programming, and achieve results.

The Federal Government is committed to working with First Nations on implementing the National Child Benefit (NCB) in ways compatible with their unique needs. As noted under Q.48 and Q.50, the NCB is designed to promote attachment to the workforce.

Also part of the Government's response to RCAP is DIAND's An Agenda for Action with First Nations, which outlines specific Government initiatives reflecting the mutual commitment to a renewed relationship.

One of the four main themes in the Agenda for Action is the commitment to support stronger First Nations communities, enhance economic development, and increase individual and community self-reliance within a strategic and planned approach, developed in partnership and addressing the issues of standards, comparability and performance indicators.

In addition to An Agenda for Action with First Nations, initiatives were developed for the Inuit people of the North in Gathering Strength. The challenge for the North was to develop new governance institutions which are sensitive to Aboriginal interests, and to the shared interests of all people in Canada, while working to strengthen the North's economic base. In less than a year, Canada will have a new, third territory in the North, called Nunavut, governed by the Inuit of the eastern Arctic through a public government structure. Training and staffing efforts are underway to ensure that 85% of the Nunavut civil service are Inuit, reflecting their proportionate representation within the broader population of the region and providing significant employment opportunities.

27. According to Statistics Canada, in 1991 over 40% of people with disabilities received no employment income compared to 18.5% for people without disabilities and the unemployment statistics for people with disabilities are among the highest of all minority groups. What are the steps taken by the federal, provincial and territorial governments to remedy this situation?

The Government of Canada has employment equity legislation in force that requires employees in regulated industries and contractors to the government to work towards a representative labour force, which includes disabled persons. In addition there are support programs at the federal, provincial and territorial levels to assist disabled participation in the labour force through active job matching services, placement programs and financial assistance for workplace modifications and specialized on-the-job equipment.

Since the UN International Year of Disabled Persons in 1981, Canada has made important progress in its treatment of disability issues. Work has been done at all levels of government and with the disability community to identify areas that should be targeted for improvement. Early in the process, it was recognized that major issue areas such as education, training, disability supports and employment are inter-related and that progress will be achieved only if the linkages are appropriately made. In March 1998, Canada received the UN Franklin Delano Roosevelt Award in recognition of its achievement over the years at integrating persons with disabilities in the social and economic life of the country. In receiving the award, the Prime Minister recognized that in spite of our achievements, a lot remains to be done for Canadians with disabilities.

At their June 1996 First Ministers' Meeting, the Prime Minister, Premiers and Territorial Government Leaders identified persons with disabilities as a collective priority in the pursuit of social policy renewal. The social policy renewal exercise is an effort at modernizing Canada's social policies and the establishment of a new partnership among governments (federal, provincial and territorial). This commitment to persons with disabilities was reaffirmed by First Ministers at their meeting in December 1997.

Consistent with this mandate, federal, provincial and territorial Ministers Responsible for Social Services have been focussing on reform of the broader system of benefits and services for persons with disabilities. Their efforts have resulted in the development of a common vision and policy framework. The document In Unison: A Canadian Approach to Disability Issues was endorsed in March 1998 by the Federal Cabinet and approved by the provincial and territorial Ministers Responsible for Social Services. Discussions with the disability community regarding this document took place in July 1998. In Unison provides objectives and policy directions for future reform in four key areas: citizenship, disability supports, employment and income.

In Unison recognizes that governments, private and voluntary sectors, and citizens all have a key role to play in the achievement of the full participation of persons with disabilities in Canadian society. In Unison promotes policies and programs that support persons with disabilities to overcome the barriers they face in the labour force so that they have the same opportunity as other Canadians to lead economically independent lives.

Recently, the federal, provincial and territorial governments have worked together to replace the old Vocational Rehabilitation for Disabled Persons program (VRDP) with the new Employability Assistance for People with Disabilities program (EAPD). EAPD has a strong employability focus and results-based accountability. It responds to the need identified by the disability community for appropriate programs and services that support people with disabilities to overcome the barriers they face in the labour force. The disability community was consulted in the development of EAPD.

In addition, the federal government created the Opportunities Fund to work in partnership with organizations of persons with disabilities and other sectors to support innovative approaches to integrating persons with disabilities into employment. Clients are persons with disabilities who require assistance to prepare for, find and keep work, and who are more 'job ready' than those who will benefit from the assistance of EAPD. The disability community was involved in the development of the Opportunities Fund.

Furthermore, the federal government is working with the provinces and territories as well as interested stakeholders, including Aboriginal groups, on the development of a Federal Disability Strategy which is intended to address a range of issues concerning disability supports, employment and income support.

With respect to Aboriginal people in particular, the federal government is proceeding with demonstration projects under a special initiative which encourages greater participation in the labour force by residents of First Nations now on social assistance. Disabled people are expected to benefit from this initiative.

The Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy described under Q.26 will also address employment and training issues of concern to disabled Aboriginal people.

28. Please provide information as to the minimum wage rate in various provinces and territories and any changes in its real value over the last few years. Please indicate how the income from a full time job at a minimum wage compares with the poverty line. What do the federal and provincial governments intend to do to ensure that minimum wages are adequate?

As of August 20, 1998, minimum wage rates for experienced adult workers in Canada's provinces and territories ranged from a low of $5.00 per hour in Alberta to a high of $7.15 per hour in British Columbia.

Minimum Hourly Wage Rates for Experienced Adult Workers in Canada as August 20, 1998

To ensure that minimum wages are adequate, each province and territory periodically reviews its minimum wage taking into account the cost of living, economic conditions and other relevant factors.

Some provinces and territories use minimum wage boards to set the rates. These boards are usually composed of representatives of employers and employees, with the chairperson being frequently an officer of the department of labour. They hold public hearings and make extensive inquiries before minimum wage orders are put into effect.

In the five provinces that do not use a minimum wage board, the review of the minimum wage is incumbent upon the Lieutenant-Governor in Council.

29. Please provide information as to the transformation of women's work to more precarious forms (part-time, homework, etc) and the economic consequence of these changes on the poverty of women, particularly young single women with dependent children.

Increasing competition from the global market place coupled with technological innovations has led to changes in the nature of work in Canada. More flexible forms of employment - such as part-time and contingent positions, telework, and other forms of non-standard work - have become more prevalent in the Canadian labour market in recent years and growth in these areas continues.

In 1994, 33% of those employed between the ages of 15 and 64 were employed in some form of non-standard work, an increase of 5% from 1989 figures (7). This trend is more pronounced for youth and women. For example, in 1995, over 24% of employed women engaged in part-time work, compared with 8% of men (8). Women also predominate in the growing area of home-based work.

Non-standard forms of work can offer some advantages for women who want greater flexibility in balancing their family and paid work responsibilities. With increasing numbers of women with young children entering the labour force, this type of work may become increasingly necessary in order to balance child care and work responsibilities, especially for female lone parents.

While women may benefit from the flexibility of this type of work, it can also render them economically vulnerable. Generally, these forms of work offer lower wages and fewer benefits.

In Setting the Stage for the Next Century: the Federal Plan for Gender Equality, the Government of Canada recognizes the need to monitor and assess the economic and social vulnerability of non-standard workers in Canada, particularly women working in home-based, piece-rate assembly, clerical, textile and other low income jobs. One initiative which responds to this commitment is the report of the Advisory Committee on the Changing Workplace, entitled Collective Reflection. This report, released by the Minister of Labour in June 1997, examines the changing nature of work and considers how workplace change might better meet the needs of both workers and employers in Canada.

Recent reforms to Canada's Employment Insurance system (1996) incorporate measures which address the needs of non-standard workers and benefit women in a number of ways. The new Employment Insurance system ensures that eligible part-time workers and multiple job holders are fully covered, that active employment benefits help women find jobs and that low income claimants with children, two-thirds of whom are women, receive the Family Income Supplement. In addition, the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans recognize that women's patterns of non-market work, employment and remuneration are very different from those of men. The Plans includes features such as the child-rearing drop out provision, credit-splitting (of pension credits upon divorce and separation) and survivor's benefits (upon the death of a spouse) which recognize women's role as the primary care-givers in the household.

30. What steps have been taken by the Federal Government to implement the recommendation of the Canadian Human Rights Commission so that employers' and workers' representatives are required to take the initiative to implement pay parity between men and women?

The Commission recommends proactive legislation parallel to that in the recent Employment Equity Act because it believes that this approach is preferable to a complaints based system in dealing with systemic discrimination such as employment or pay equity. This would be an extremely significant legislative initiative which requires consultation and analysis. Until recently, the government's priority was Bill S-5, amending the Canadian Human Rights Act by adding the duty to accommodate, making the Tribunal more efficient and improving other aspects of the Act. The government is in the process of completing implementation of Bill S-5 and is now turning its mind to the new priority: a comprehensive review of the Canadian Human Rights Act, to ensure that it is effective in promoting human rights in the new millennium. One of the key aspects to be considered is how best to redress systemic discrimination.

31. Please provide information regarding the rights of farm workers and domestic workers to organize and bargain collectively and identify any changes in provincial labour legislation which has affected these rights. is there any other justification for denying these workers collective bargaining rights accorded to other workers?

32. How does the Canadian Government explain the dramatic decreases in the percentage of unemployed workers receiving Employment Insurance benefits from 83% in 1990 to 43% in 1997? Have the changes in the EI program disproportionately affected vulnerable groups in Canada? Has there been any decline in the number of women receiving maternity benefits?

Although the percentage of unemployed workers receiving EI benefits (B/U ratio) is commonly used to measure program coverage, it is an imperfect measure. Some beneficiaries are not considered unemployed (e.g., they work while on claim or indicate they are not looking for work) and some are only temporarily ineligible for benefits (e.g., they are receiving severance pay or are in the 2-week waiting period before benefits begin). In addition, not all unemployment results from job loss. Many of the unemployed have little or no previous work or voluntarily left their employment.

The decline in the B/U ratio is attributable to changes in the labour market (e.g., the growth in long-term unemployment, the growth in non-insured work such as self-employment, and the increase in new entrants and re-entrants to the labour market) as well as changes to the Unemployment Insurance/Employment Insurance program (e.g., higher entrance requirements, cuts in duration of benefits, and exclusion of those who quit their jobs without just cause). In order to pinpoint the reasons for the declining B/U ratio, the government is undertaking an in-depth analysis of the issue and its implications for the EI program; a paper based on this analysis will be released in late 1998.

In the first year following the 1996 EI reform, there were larger than expected declines in the number of claims and the amount paid out in benefits. Program changes were just one factor,; the improving economy, stronger job creation and the decline in job losses also contributed to this decline.

The reform was designed to protect the benefits of those most in need. For example, the maximum benefit rate for claimants eligible for the new family income supplement for low-income claimants with children is 70% of average earnings in 1998 and will rise to 80% of the maximum benefit allowed by 2000. For all other claimants, the benefit rate is 55%. About two-thirds of those receiving the family income supplement are women, and overall the decline in benefits was somewhat less for women than for men. Young people experienced a greater than average decline in benefits, but continue to be a top priority for employment programs funded from outside the EI system.

The new EI Act requires the government to monitor and assess the impacts of EI reform on individuals, communities, and the economy and make annual reports to Parliament for the years 1997 to 2001. Analysis of the impacts of the reform on vulnerable groups is an integral part of this process.

Regarding maternity benefits, the change in entrance requirements from as few as 300 hours (20 weeks of 15 hours each) to 700 hours of work (the equivalent of 20 weeks of 35 hours each) under EI reform was expected to affect very few maternity claimants because they typically have a strong labour force attachment (on average, they work 45 weeks before applying for benefits). There was a slight decrease in the number of claims for maternity benefits in the first year following EI reform.

33. In light of the surplus in the Employment Insurance Program that is expected to reach $20 billion by the end of 1998, has the Government considered expanding coverage?

A surplus is being built in the EI Account so that, in the event of an economic downturn, benefits can be maintained and premiums would not have to rise. It should be noted that the government is obliged to continue to pay benefits even when program costs exceed contributions, as was the case during the last recession.

As previously mentioned under Q.32, an in-depth analysis of the B/U ratio issue and its implications for the EI program is under way and will help the government pinpoint the reasons for the decline. As well, the monitoring and assessment provisions introduced as part of EI reform will help to measure the impact of program changes on individuals, communities, and the economy. The second of five annual monitoring and assessment reports required under the new EI Act is now being prepared. It would be premature to consider expanding the program before the results of the B/U study and the 1998 monitoring and assessment report have been completed and evaluated.

34. Under the new legislation, is the federal government using any surplus funds to subsidize provincial workfare schemes? Since the Employment program has been solely paid for by the contributions of workers and employers since 1990, this seems to suggest a privatization of social assistance. What are the implications of this in terms of state responsibility for guaranteeing the rights in article 11?

Workfare schemes would not meet the criteria set out in the Employment Insurance Act and so could not be supported.

Under the new Act, contributions collected from workers and employers can be used only to fund the EI program. That is, the funds can be used to pay income benefits under Part I of the Act and to provide active re-employment measures under Part II of the Act.

EI reform expanded eligibility for active measures under Part II. Unemployed individuals are now eligible for these active measures if they have collected regular EI benefits in the past 3 years or maternity or parental benefits in the past 5 years. Therefore, individuals receiving social assistance may be eligible for active measures.

Under the new Labour Market Development Agreements (LMDAs) between the federal and provincial and territorial governments, responsibility for the design and delivery of Part II active measures either rests solely with the provincial or territorial government or is shared by the two levels of government.

Active measures administered by the provinces and territories and funded from the EI Account must be similar to the employment benefits and support measures provided for under Part II of the EI Act and respect the objectives and guidelines set out in Part II.

37. The Committee has received information that food bank use has continued to increase in Canada and has approximately doubled over the last ten years. Can the Government explain why the number and the use of food banks has continued to increase? Does the Government consider the need for food banks in so affluent a country as Canada consistent with article 11 of the Covenant?

38. Please provide information as to the number of people paying more than their shelter allowance for housing and indicate whether paying for housing out of money needed for food may lead to hunger in these households.

41. Please provide any available data on the extent of homelessness in various cities in Canada. At what point would the government consider homelessness in Canada to constitute a national emergency?

At present there are no comprehensive data on the extent of homelessness in Canada. Although there have been attempts to gather national data in the past, they were not statistically reliable or representative. As CMHC's Background Report points out, gathering data on homelessness is inherently difficult. Even at the conceptual level, there is no common agreement about how to define or measure homelessness.

Some cities, including Calgary and Ottawa, have attempted to develop estimates, but the methods of gathering the data vary so widely that comparison among cities is impossible. The new City of Toronto has the largest and probably the most robust data series in the country with regard to homeless persons. Based on this data set, the Interim Report of the Mayor's Homelessness Action Task Force states that just under 26,000 individuals used shelters in Toronto during the year 1996.

A significant element of CMHC's research program on homelessness is a multi-phase project to develop a computerized tool for assisting local shelters and agencies in standardizing the collection and management of data on homeless shelter users. This approach was taken following a consensus among a panel of experts that the best way to enumerate the homeless would be to partner with local services. The tool is currently under development and the next stage will involve pilot testing the software in various cities across the country.

42. Please provide information on any disparities between Aboriginal housing and other housing with respect to piped water, flush toilets, need for repairs and other indicators of adequacy.

CMHC's Background Report provides details on the housing situations of all Aboriginal people in Canada, both on and off reserve and in comparison to the general population. Aboriginal people experience significantly more housing adequacy problems than the rest of the Canadian population. The adequacy component of CMHC's core housing need model measures whether a dwelling has all basic plumbing facilities (hot and cold running water, indoor toilet, and bath or shower) and does not require major repairs. About 9% of all non-Aboriginal households in Canada live in homes that do not meet this criterion (11% in rural areas and 7% in urban areas). In contrast, almost one-quarter (23%) of all Aboriginal households' dwellings are inadequate according to this criterion.

The federal government continues to place a priority on health and safety, and, as such, the need to improve housing and water and sewer services on Indian reserves. Over the past several years, DIAND has reallocated close to $400 million in additional spending in support of water and sewer projects and has committed an additional $160 million for the implementation of a new on-reserve housing policy. The capital budget for major water and sewer projects on reserve is expected to be almost $175 million annually. In 1998-99 approximately $450 million will be spent for on-reserve housing by CMHC and DIAND. It is estimated that nearly 4,600 new housing units will be constructed and about 3,800 homes will be repaired during the current fiscal year.

The new on-reserve housing policy was announced in 1996 following extensive consultations with First Nations. The policy provides a solid framework within which First Nations can bring about overall and sustainable improvements in on-reserve housing condition. Under the policy, First Nation communities develop community-based housing programs and multi-year housing plans to maintain and rehabilitate existing housing and construct quality, affordable new housing. These housing plans are also linked with community training, job creation and business development initiatives to help maximize local benefits. Furthermore, improving community infrastructure is also a priority under Gathering Strength and An Agenda for Action.

43. At paragraph 275, the Report states that federal funding for new social housing units was terminated in 1993. How can this be justified when so many households are unable to secure appropriate housing in the private market?

As described in detail in CMHC's Background Report to the Committee, the Government of Canada continues to provide support for affordable housing in a number of ways.

The federal government, through CMHC, continues to provide approximately $1.9 billion annually to subsidize about 645,000 existing housing units, mainly for low income households. The federal government also emphasizes the preservation of the existing affordable housing stock through such programs as the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP), the Emergency Repair Program (ERP) and Home Adaptations for Seniors Independence (HASI), and on January 30, 1998 announced an extension of funding for these programs for five years at a cost of $250 million ($50 million per year). The CMHC Background Report notes that over 124,000 units were assisted under federal and joint federal-provincial-territorial rehabilitation programs between 1990 and 1995.

Further, the provision of National Housing Act (NHA) mortgage loan insurance enables persons to purchase homes with low down payments and at favourable mortgage interest rates. The NHA Mortgage-Backed Securities program ensures the supply of low-cost funds for mortgages.

The federal government continues to provide funding for housing on Indian reserves. In 1998-99 approximately $450 million will be spent for on-reserve housing by CMHC and the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development. It is estimated that nearly 4,600 new housing units

will be constructed and about 3,800 homes will be repaired during the current fiscal year.

CMHC is also engaged in a number of partnership activities that support the production of affordable housing. The Canadian Centre for Public-Private Partnerships in Housing (CCPPPH) helps community-based groups to develop affordable housing without long-term government subsidies. Homegrown Solutions encourages the development of innovative housing solutions at the local level. Affordability and Choice Today (ACT) promotes changes to planning and building regulations that will eliminate barriers to housing innovation and improve housing affordability.

44. According to information provided to the Committee from Statistics Canada, the percentage of government expenditure on housing has declined since 1993. There has been extensive media coverage of a growing crisis of homelessness in Toronto, Vancouver and elsewhere, emphasizing primarily charity-based efforts to address the problems. Is the Government applying the "maximum of available resources" to eliminating homelessness and does it agree that guaranteeing the right to housing is a core responsibility of governments and a matter of the highest priority?

The Government of Canada continues to play an important role in fostering a strong economy that sustains and creates jobs, which in turn enable the vast majority of Canadians to address their own housing needs without direct government subsidy. In fact, over a quarter of a million new jobs were created in Canada in 1997. Moreover, the Government actively cultivates a stable financial environment that promotes excellent housing affordability, including access to home ownership for most Canadians. Inflation rates have remained low, and mortgage interest rates have been the lowest in over 30 years. These combined with an abundant supply of affordable homes on the market have led to record levels of first-time buying. Recently released Census data indicate that the home ownership rate in Canada was 63.6% in 1996, compared to 62.6% in 1991 and 62.1% in 1986.

Canada has a federal system with more than one "level" of government having independent responsibilities with regard to housing issues. Most assistance for shelter needs flows through income support channels rather than bricks-and-mortar approaches. As Table 22 of the CMHC background report shows, the combined direct government expenditure on housing in Canada has risen since 1990 from $3.5 billion to approximately $4 billion per year. In addition, income support provided through the Canada Assistance Plan is estimated to have provided another $5.2 billion specifically for shelter in 1993, bringing the total expenditure on housing to $9.2 billion for that year. Total government expenditure on housing is actually higher than this because of expenditures through other components of the national income security system, but no reliable estimates for these components are available. Also not included in these totals are the tax expenditures made by the Canadian government in support of housing. Estimates for 1997, for instance, indicate that non-taxation of capital gains on principal residences amounted to as much as $1.5 billion, the GST rebate on new housing cost $505 million, and the tax exemption on residential rents totalled $1.6 billion.

The existing social housing stock supported by the Government of Canada at a cost of $1.9 billion per year includes facilities for homeless people and those at risk of becoming homeless. Federal transfers to the provinces through the CHST also provide funding to support a broad range of programs for the homeless. Further, the federal government provides $2 million annually for upgrading or constructing shelters for victims of domestic violence who might otherwise not have access to appropriate accommodation.

The Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program (RRAP) and the Emergency Repair Program (ERP), also referenced in the response to Question 43, both benefit the homeless. RRAP provides assistance to low income home-owners to bring their homes up to basic health and safety standards, and to persons with disabilities to make their homes accessible. A special component of RRAP is targeted to improving rental housing and rooming houses occupied by low income tenants. ERP provides assistance to undertake emergency repairs on homes located in rural areas to ensure continued safe occupancy.

CMHC has funded a number of research projects on homelessness, with recent emphasis on ways the problem could be better quantified. A national forum for research on homelessness was established by CMHC in 1994. This includes representatives from governmental and non-governmental organizations. In 1999, CMHC plans to sponsor a forum on "best practices" for addressing homelessness. CMHC is currently working with several major cities on initiatives designed to address homelessness, including Toronto, where CMHC is supporting the work of the Mayor's Homelessness Action Task Force, and Vancouver, where CMHC is working with the City to determine if the rental component of RRAP could be used to rehabilitate two inner-city apartment hotels.

The CMHC Background Report contains a section on homelessness and a section on housing-related expenditures by governments in Canada.

47. Does the Government support the recommendations of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples that the Canadian Human Rights Act be amended to authorize inquiries into whether relocations of Aboriginal peoples were legal and permit court action to obtain redress?

This recommendation proposes a significant new role for the Commission and further, that the Commission be given the power to apply its act retroactively, that is, prior to 1978. One of the key aspects of the upcoming comprehensive review of the Canadian Human Rights Acts will be the role of the Commission.

Canada works with Aboriginal communities on a case-by-case basis to address any problems and issues which may exist as a result of past relocations. The criteria for relocations outlined in the RCAP report are useful and consistent with the approach that the federal governments now takes in any relocations. In the case of the relocation of the Davis Inlet community, for example, the community gave their free and informed consent through a public ratification process, and community planning was carried out jointly over a reasonable period of time. In this way, it is possible to find solutions that meet the unique needs and circumstances of the individual communities involved.

The federal government is currently working with one community to document the story of their relocation in order to inform any remedial measures the government may determine as necessary. In the meantime, Canada has provided significant resources to the First Nation to assist in providing better housing, water treatment, education, health and policing services to its community.

48. .Although the last recession ended in 1991, poverty rates have risen steadily since then. Please provide to the Committee the most up to date information on single parents, children, people with disabilities and Aboriginal people and explain how this unacceptable situation has been allowed to occur.

Despite the lack of an official measure of poverty (whether poverty rates or poverty line), the Government of Canada does recognize that many individuals and families in Canada are living in relative poverty. Statistics Canada produces annual data on persons and families who appear substantially worse off than average Canadians according to a statistical norm called the Low Income Cut-Offs (LICOs) (9). These are used as indicators of those segments of the population most in need of government assistance.

The latest LICO data relate to 1996. These estimates use the 1992 base year, which considers as having low income those families or persons who spend 54.7% or more of their income on food, shelter and clothing.

According to these figures, in 1996, there were 21% of children less than 18 years of age who lived in low-income families. Nearly 57% of all single parent families (headed by a person aged less than 65) were low income. As well, about 31% of male-headed lone parent families were low income while more than 60% of female-headed lone parent families were in the same situation. It is worth noting that in that year, single parent families represented 18.6% of all families with children (headed by people younger than 65). Source: Statistics Canada catalogue 13-207-XPB – Income distribution by Size in Canada, 1996

While no equivalent and as timely data on Aboriginal peoples are available, the RCAP Report documented some of the conditions they face. For example, based on 1991 census information, RCAP told us that in Winnipeg, Regina and Saskatoon, more than 60% of Aboriginal households were below the LICOs. For single-parent households headed by women, the situation was worse. Source: Report of the Royal Commission on Aboriginal Peoples, 1996

With respect to disability, the most recent data are from the 1991 Health and Activity Limitation survey. These data show that almost 22% of disabled persons between the ages of 15 and 64 had incomes below the LICO. Source : Living with Disability in Canada : an Economic Portrait. HRDC, Office for Disability Issues, 1996

Based on these indicators, low income families with children, Aboriginal peoples, and persons with disabilities are more vulnerable than other Canadians. This is why new initiatives have been put in place expressly for them. Canada is taking action on many fronts.

First, Canada is concerned about the well-being of its children. This is why children are a public priority for the Government of Canada and the provinces, as evidenced by the National Child Benefit (NCB) introduced in 1998. The NCB is designed to improve services and benefits for low income families with children. It will contribute to reduce the depth of child poverty and promote attachment to the workforce by ensuring that families will always be better off as a result of working (see response to Q. 50 and Child Benefit documentation provided separately).

Several other programs help support children from low income families; for example the family income supplement for low income Employment Insurance recipients with children.

The Government of Canada is working with provincial and territorial governments, and others, on the development of a National Children's Agenda, to include a shared vision and values for children. Over the coming months, the Ministerial Council on Social Policy Reform will be considering ways to involve Canadians, to make this a truly national undertaking.

Second, Canada is concerned about the well being of Aboriginal families. The federal government is committed to working with First Nations on implementing the NCB in ways that address the complex nature of social development on reserves.

In a broader context, Gathering Strength, the formal response to the RCAP Final Report, and the ensuing Agenda for Action with First Nations outline the objectives and specific initiatives to reflect the mutual commitment of Aboriginal leaders and the federal government to a renewed relationship. One of the four major themes of the Agenda for Action is support to stronger First Nations communities and people. Included are measures to support healthy sustainable communities, enhance economic development, and increase individual and community self-reliance.

These initiatives also include measures to support the development of an economic base on reserves, through activities which build local capacities to encourage and facilitate welfare-to-work transitions. The federal government is working with First Nations to reform the on-reserve welfare system from passive to active case management, develop a new framework for the Social Assistance Program administered by the First Nations, and increase the First Nations' capacity to reduce welfare dependency through measures to increase employability and reduce poverty on reserves. Additional measures to support the labour market participation of Aboriginals are described under Q. 26.

Third, Canada has taken steps to reduce the poverty conditions experienced by persons with disabilities. In March 1998, Canada received the UN Franklin Delano Roosevelt Award in recognition of its achievement over the years at integrating persons with disabilities to the social and economic life of the country. In receiving this award, the Prime Minister acknowledged that much remained to be done for Canadians with disabilities. As evidenced by their December 1997 commitment, First Ministers throughout Canada remain set on further progress for disabled persons (see Q. 27). Both the federal-provincial-territorial initiatives and the federal strategy for persons with disabilities will address the needs of Aboriginal people.

49. The Chief Commissioner of the Canadian Human Rights Commission was quoted in the Globe and Mail on March 25, 1998 as saying: "Poverty is a serious breach of equality rights which I believe has no place in a country as prosperous as ours." Does the Government agree with this statement?

The Government is committed to ensuring that all Canadians have a decent standard of living, with appropriate health care and education. Canada is fulfilling these commitments primarily through social benefits legislation and programs, bearing in mind the economic realities and the division of powers between the federal and provincial governments.

50. What measures did the federal and provincial governments take to follow up on the recommendations of the Committee in 1993 to reduce the gap between welfare rates and the poverty line? Has this gap been reduced? If not, what is the explanation for the Government's failure to address this pressing need during a time of relative economic prosperity?

The design and administration of social assistance programs falls under the jurisdiction of provincial and territorial governments, and each provincial and territorial authority establishes its own social assistance benefit levels.

While the Federal Government plays no role in establishing social assistance benefit levels, it is committed to helping Canadians achieve a good standard of living. The Government has successfully put the nation's fiscal house in order and the prospects for long-term economic growth and employment are good. In keeping with the belief that the best solution to poverty is jobs, the Government has invested in a number of major initiatives to support labour market participation and thereby address poverty.

First, federal, provincial and territorial Ministers responsible for Social Services have agreed to an innovative and progressive approach for investing in children. Effective in July 1998, The National Child Benefit (NCB) expands and enhances the $7 billion that governments have provided for low- and middle-income families with children. The objectives of the NCB are to reduce the incidence and depth of child poverty and to promote attachment to the workforce – resulting in fewer families having to rely on provincial or territorial social assistance programs – by ensuring that families are better off as a result of employment.

As its initial participation to this initiative, the federal government is already providing $850 million to enhance the Canada Child Tax Benefit as a common income platform across the country. The federal government also undertook to increase its investment in the Canada Child Tax Benefit by another $850 million ($425 million in 1999 and $425 million in 2000). As Government of Canada funding for children's income support increases, provinces and territories will decrease social assistance payments for families with children and have begun to reinvest these newly available funds. These investments are targeted for improving work incentives, benefits and services for low income families with children. Overall income support to families on social assistance will remain at least the same. And when parents move from welfare to work, the NCB will ensure their children continue to receive needed financial assistance. (See "National Child Benefit" information kit provided separately for details on how the new program mentioned in paragraph 98 of the Report has been implemented.)

Canada's Youth Employment Strategy, the Canadian Opportunities Fund (described under Q.59), the Aboriginal Human Resources Development Strategy and Agenda for Action with First Nations (described under Q.48) and the new employability initiatives for persons with disabilities (described under Q.27), as well as recent reforms to Canada's Employment Insurance system (described in Q.32) are all examples of targeted Government measures which are contributing to labour market participation and the fight against poverty.

As well, the Old Age Security program and the maturing of the Canada and Quebec Pension Plans have helped to significantly reduce poverty among Canadian seniors. Rates of low income among seniors have declined from 33.6% in 1980 to 18.9% in 1996, reflecting improvements in Canada's pension systems.

51. It has been reported that in Canada, close to one in four persons with disabilities lives below the poverty line. What are the steps taken by the federal, provincial and territorial government to remedy this situation?

In 1991, there were almost twice as many adults with disabilities living in poverty as there were adults without disabilities (21.9 compared to 12.6%) in Canada. This is a serious concern for all levels of government, and a variety of measures have been taken on various fronts. The Government of Canada has introduced tax measures in each of its recent budgets to reduce the additional costs of having a disability. Federal, provincial and territorial governments are working to make disability supports and services available to those who need them and to make them portable across the various stages of life - from home to school to work - in order to reduce duplication of costs.

Because persons with disabilities who have paid employment are less likely to have low income than those who are unemployed or out of the labour force, governments have put an emphasis on active employment measures as described in response to Q.27. In Unison recognizes that disincentives to work compromise the economic independence of persons with disabilities. It supports more flexible and client-focused income programs that support incentives to work. Many government initiatives, while working at eliminating disincentives to work and encouraging economic independence, will continue to provide financial assistance when labour market participation of persons with disabilities is interrupted or not possible.

52. What are the implications of removing civil legal aid from federal-provincial cost-sharing which was previously under CAP? Do restrictions on civil legal aid deny the right to benefit from effective remedies in the case of violation of their economic and social rights or result in a "hierarchy of rights" with respect to access to justice?

Civil legal aid was previously funded under the Canada Assistance Plan (CAP) as an item of special need and since 1996-97 forms part of the block-funded Canada Health and Social Transfer (CHST). The CHST provides provincial and territorial governments with greater flexibility to innovate and improve social programs. Administration of the programs, both civil and criminal legal aid, remains a provincial and territorial responsibility.

The Supreme Court of Canada will soon be considering whether s. 7 of the Charter guarantees a right to state-funded counsel in a non-criminal context. New Brunswick (Minister of Health and Community Services) v. J.G., which is scheduled for hearing this Fall, concerns the right of a parent to state-funded legal counsel to oppose a custody application by the Minister of Health and Community Services.

53. In 1993 the Government informed the Committee that section 7 of the Charter at least guaranteed that people are not to be deprived of basic necessities and may be interpreted to include rights under the Covenant, such as rights under article 11. Is that still the position of all governments in Canada?

The Supreme Court of Canada has stated that section 7 of the Charter may be interpreted to include the rights protected under the Covenant (see decision of Slaight Communications v. Davidson [1989] 1 S.C.R. 1038). The Supreme Court has also held section 7 as guaranteeing that people are not to be deprived of basic necessities (see decision of Irwin Toy v. A.-G. Québec, [1989] 1 S.C.R. 927). The Government of Canada is bound by these interpretations of section 7 of the Charter.

54. Does the Canadian government have any evidence of restrictions in access to health care for the poor? If so, what is the government doing to remedy this situation?

Canada has a publicly financed health care system that is best described as an interlocking set of ten provincial and two territorial health insurance plans, better known as "medicare". This system provides all residents of Canada with reasonable access to medically necessary hospital and physician services on a prepaid basis, and on uniform terms and conditions (patients are not required to pay at the time they receive medical attention). Under this universal system, rationing of health care services occurs on the basis of need, not financial means. As a result, waiting periods do exist for certain health care services. However, as reported in a recent study by the Manitoba Centre for Health Policy and Evaluation on waiting times for selected services in that province, waiting periods are fairly stable and not increasing. Rural residents do not wait longer for services than urban residents, women do not wait longer than men, and wealthy residents are not "bumped up" ahead of middle-or low income patients.

The Canada Health Act stipulates the criteria that provincial health insurance plans must meet in order for a province to The Canada Health Act stipulates the criteria that provincial health insurance plans must meet in order for a province to qualify for its full federal transfer payments. The five criteria are known as the "principles" of Canada's national health care system:

The health insurance plan of a province must be administered and operated on a non-profit basis by a public authority accountable to the provincial government.

The plan must insure all medically necessary services provided by hospitals and physicians. Insured hospital services include in-patient care at the ward level (unless private or semi-private rooms are medically necessary) and all necessary drugs, supplies and diagnostic tests, as well as a broad range of out-patient services. Chronic care services are also insured, although some payment in respect of accommodation costs may be required by patients who are more or less permanently resident in the institution.

The plan must entitle 100 percent of the insured population (i.e, eligible residents) to insured health services on uniform terms and conditions.

The plan must provide, on uniform terms and conditions, reasonable access to insured hospital and physician services without barriers. Additional charges to insured patients for insured services are not allowed. No one may be discriminated against on the basis of income, age, health status, etc.

Residents are entitled to coverage when they move to another province within Canada or when they travel within Canada or abroad. All provinces have some limits on coverage for services provided outside Canada, and may require prior approval for non-emergency out-of-province services.

Health Canada, as the federal department responsible for health, has also developed partnerships with provinces, territories, and key professional and grass-roots organizations to develop approaches to removing barriers to income support and non-insured medical services. Some examples of these approaches are: recognizing HIV/AIDS as a disability; improving coverage for food supplements and nutrition; improving outreach to marginalized persons and their families; and reviewing inequities between rural and urban services and services in different regions, including services to Aboriginal peoples.

55. The Committee understands that a high percentage of discharged psychiatric patients are ending up homeless. Please provide as accurate evidence as is available in relation to this problem and explain what is being done to address it.

Health Canada is not directly involved in issues dealing with the discharge of psychiatric patients. This is a matter dealt with primarily by provincial ministries of health, municipalities and hospitals.

56. Please provide any information available on the particular health problems of the homeless, including tuberculosis rates and identify any barriers faced by the homeless in getting access to appropriate health care.

Tuberculosis is an airborne infectious disease. Most individuals who are exposed to the bacteria that causes this disease and become infected do not go on to develop active infectious disease if they are in generally good health. Homeless individuals, however, are considered to be a high risk group for this disease. They are more likely to become exposed to this disease as a result of environmental conditions (e.g. overcrowding in shelters) and their general level of health and immunity is poorer (e.g. poor nutrition, other medical conditions), thus making them more likely to go on and develop active TB disease following infection compared to the general population.

Currently, no data are collected at the national level regarding TB cases among homeless individuals.

The total reported number of cases in Canada and the corresponding incidence rate per 100,000 over the past several years are as follows:

Year	No. of cases	Rate per 100,000
1990	1,997	7.2
1991	2,018	7.2
1992	2,108	7.4
1993	2,012	7.0
1994	2,074	7.1
1995	1,930	6.5
1996	1,849	6.2 (1996 figures due to be released publicly shortly)

57. To what extent is increased reliance on expensive drug therapy for HIV/AIDS and other illnesses eroding universal access to health care? Will programs such as pharmacare be introduced to cover drug costs?

There is no evidence that increased reliance on expensive drug therapy for HIV/AIDS is eroding universal access to health care. However, for the working poor without a drug plan, access to these drugs is limited. This increases the likelihood that they will need more care and treatment than those who have easier access to required drug therapies. As well, the expanding HIV epidemics and advent of rapid HIV testing have implications on the demand and access to drug therapies. Health Canada is considering these implications through collaborative efforts with the Federal Provincial Territorial Advisory Committee on HIV/AIDS and the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Committee on Pharmaceutical Issues.

Canadians' access to high cost drug therapies (e.g., for HIV/AIDS, Cancer, Multiple Sclerosis etc.), and the affordability of these drugs for public and private payers, are important issues facing Canada's health system.

The Canada Health Act (CHA) is the federal legislation which sets out the basic criteria and conditions that provincial and territorial health insurance plans must meet to qualify for federal transfer payments under the Canada Health and Social Transfer. Under the Act, provincial and territorial health insurance plans are required to provide their residents with medically necessary drugs received in the hospital free of charge. There is, however, no requirement for drugs received outside of hospitals.

Consequently, drugs outside of a hospital setting are financed by a combination of public and private payers, including federal, provincial and territorial governments (through pharmacare programs), private insurers (insurance companies, employers and unions), and individuals paying out-of-pocket.

The trend towards shorter hospital stays has resulted in a greater share of prescription drugs being financed outside of a hospital setting - effectively transferring drug costs from the institution to individuals. At the same time, the increasing role of drug therapy in health care (including increasing numbers of innovative, expensive drug therapies), and increasing spending on drugs (due to demographic, price and utilization factors) has placed pressure on public and private drug programs, and on individuals.

The National Forum on Health (1997) recommended establishing a single-payer, publicly financed system for pharmaceuticals. The federal government has since committed to "developing a national plan, timetable and a fiscal framework for providing Canadians with better access to medically necessary drugs" (Speech from the Throne, September 23, 1997).

The federal government's primary partner on any health issue, including pharmacare, is always the provinces and territories, given their jurisdiction in the delivery of health care. Health Canada is collaborating with provinces and territories to address important issues common to all of Canada's publicly financed drug programs, both through federal-provincial task forces and working groups, and by funding projects on pharmacare (one of four priority areas) under a $150 million Health Transition Fund. Consultations with the various other stakeholders will also be important.

How quickly the objective of national approaches to pharmacare can be achieved will depend on the availability of resources, the government's ability to fill the information gaps, and whether the federal government can reach agreement with provincial and territorial governments and other stakeholders.

58. What steps are being taken in Canada to ensure that charges in health service delivery do not adversely affect the most vulnerable groups in society?

The universality of Canada's health care system is the primary mechanism to ensure that changes in health service delivery do not adversely affect the most vulnerable groups in society. The federal health insurance legislation, the Canada Health Act (CHA), requires that medically necessary hospital and physician services be insured on a prepaid basis, and on uniform terms and conditions. The determination of medical necessity falls under provincial and territorial jurisdiction, as does the administration and delivery of health care services. Any service provided by a physician or in a hospital that is considered to be medically necessary in the treatment of disease or condition would be covered by provincial and territorial health insurance plans.

In addition to the provision of medically necessary hospital and physician services, provincial and territorial governments may also offer "additional benefits" at their own discretion. The decision whether to insure these additional services is made on the basis of population needs. One example of such services is prescription drug benefits.

In general terms, the combination of universal physician and hospital services and the additional benefits provided by the provinces and territories ensure that vulnerable groups in Canadian society are not denied access to quality care. Recent surveys on waits for a range of health care procedures, both urgent and non-urgent, demonstrate that there are not significant barriers to access.

Jurisdiction	Wage Rate
Federal	Same as the general adult minimum wage rate in each provincial and territorial jurisdiction
Newfoundland	$5.25
Prince Edward Island	$5.40
Nova Scotia	$5.50
New Brunswick	$5.50
Quebec	$6.80
Ontario	$6.85
Manitoba	$5.40
Saskatchewan	$5.60
Alberta	$5.00
British Columbia	$7.15
Northwest Territories	$6.50
Yukon Territory	$7.06

Provinces	1992	1993	1994	1995	1996	1997
Newfoundland	4.75	4.67	4.66	4.56	4.56	4.82
Prince Edward Island	4.75	4.67	4.66	4.56	4.61	4.86
Nova Scotia	5.00	5.06	5.05	4.94	4.91	5.10
New Brunswick	5.00	4.91	4.90	4.80	5.08	5.11
Quebec	5.59	5.64	5.77	5.87	6.15	6.25
Ontario	6.06	6.24	6.57	6.57	6.47	6.37
Manitoba	5.00	4.91	4.90	4.92	5.10	5.02
Saskatchewan	5.03	5.26	5.25	5.13	5.07	5.20
Alberta	4.87	4.91	4.90	4.80	4.72	4.65
British Columbia	5.46	5.77	5.88	6.28	6.61	6.51