Cross-country consultations
for an accessible Canada
By
Randy Pinsky
Recently, Montrealers packed the Palais
des Congrès to discuss gaps in the system for those with a disability as
part of a cross-country consultation for a national law of accessibility.
Stakeholders with physical, hearing, visual, as well as intellectual
disabilities, reinforced the need to be considered in all aspects of this
planned legislation in order to have a truly ‘inclusive’ Canada.
Armed with powerful testimonies, individuals representing various
interest groups expressed concerns and suggested areas requiring attention.
From the need for more accessible housing and equal employment opportunities,
to services for people with special needs and signing interpreters at health
centers, this truly was an active community coming together, determined to be
heard.
And heard they were! Stéphane Lauzon, Parliamentary Secretary for Sport and Persons with Disabilities, introduced
the parameters of the consultation for this historical law of accessibility,
ending with, “à vous, la parole!”
But how did this whole discussion come about? The Honourable Carla
Qualtrough, Minister of Sport and Persons
with Disabilities (Canada’s first minister for this clientele) and a former
Paralympian, was charged with the task of creating a law of accessibility with
nation-wide applicability. (See our feature article about The Honourable
Qualtrough in the Fall 2016 / Winter 2017 edition of Inspirations.) How ‘accessibility’
was to be defined and implemented necessitated public input and contributions.
A cross-Canada public
consultation tour was launched in September 2016, and will continue
until February 2017. Its mission is to identify challenges in daily life and
areas in need of improvement, as well as contest misconceptions about
disability (and ability!). According to the official website, “the
government of Canada is committed to eliminating systemic barriers and
delivering equality of opportunity to all Canadians” in order to create a
inclusive society.
 |
The Honorable Carla Qualtrough, Minister of Sport and Persons with Disabilities.
|
While
a number of motions for accessibility exist (such as wheelchair-accessible
buses), these are often viewed as mere tokens as opposed to truly meaningful
actions. Participants argued that the system is slow to change, and operates in
a reactive manner with the onus being on the individual with disability; a
process Qualtrough terms as “exhausting, expansive and unfairly burdensome”.
She continued: “When systems and spaces are accessible, every Canadian wins.
Barriers are bad for business”.
As
reinforced in the consultation, change is long overdue. Our neighbours to the South
have had the Americans with Disabilities
Act since 1990, and while some provinces have accessibility legislation,
they are recent or still in the process of adoption.
For
an accessibility legislation to be truly effective, those directly impacted
must be involved at all aspects of the decision-making process. Such a
sentiment was echoed in the Montreal consultation by a community leader for the
hearing-impaired who stated: “We talk about accessibility and equality but when
decisions are made, they are made by hearing people, not us. We are only
consulted after they have been agreed
upon”. Other speakers with physical challenges reinforced the irony of being
expected to approve resolutions made by able-bodied individuals.
Over 150 individuals representing various interest
groups attended the Montreal public consultation on the planned law for
accessibility at Palais des Congrès, November 16, 2016.
Photo credit: Government
of Canada Source: http://www.quebec-accessible.ca/
In order for adaptations to occur and for difference to be celebrated, the
public needs to be sensitized to the daily reality of those with alternative
abilities. Disability activist Aimee Louw (representing Paul Tshuma, an
accessibility consultant) expressed the need for those with disabilities to be
central to such public education campaigns. Stereotypes and misconceptions can
only be contested if the public mindset is challenged; something she feels must
be “led by us, ourselves”.
All of these sentiments reiterate the fact that accessibility must be
viewed differently; “not [merely] as a series of boxes to check off to show
we’ve done the minimum required, but an integral part of everything we do”, as
stated in the official discussion guide.
No longer can accommodations be elective and upon demand. Accessibility
and access to needed services blends into the realm of human rights, as
powerfully described by the mother of a boy with autism.
Often described as an ‘invisible disability’, early intervention for
autism is critical to have the best possible chance of a fulfilling life, yet
diagnosis in the public system can take up to two years. The lack of resources
and services is encumbered by the fact that there is no federally mandated
protection. As the mother expressed, “If this is not done at the federal level,
what impetus is there to have anything at the provincial?” The recently
launched Center for Innovation in Autism,
See Things My Way, directly combats these
diagnostic delays, and has made significant inroads in reducing wait time.
So what does an ‘accessible Canada’ mean to You? Legislators
would do well to heed one participant’s comment; “We talk about dying with
dignity, but what about living with
it?” In order for this federally mandated legislation to lead to truly inclusive
societies, the stakeholders present at the consultations must be placed at the
centre of this historical move.
