[FEAT BC Admin]

In this topic area, discussion is about the fight to secure Government funding for your A.B.A. treatment program. It is also the place to talk about your thoughts and ideas about how to establish new Government programs specifically designed for autism treatment.

This is the place to hear input from parents who have fought for funding and won, as well as those who have fought for funding and would like to share their horror stories. There is a tendency to not share success stories once funding is secured. Please fight that tendency. By sharing our experience, we all become stronger.

 

---

—-By FEAT BC (Freeman) on Saturday, January 3, 1998 – 03:16 pm:

-Hi everyone!

These are some things to think about in your dealings with government to help you to obtain support for your child’s Autism Treatment Program. These are my personal opinions and do not represent those of FEAT of BC or any other organization.

Many of these observations are based on my personal experiences (and I believe it poetic justice to help every parent avoid being systematically abused by their social worker the way I was).

Good luck to everyone! (Let’s all pull back the curtain on the Wizard of OZ).

Sabrina

 

---

How To Fight for Funding for Autism Treatment and Appropriate School Placement

1. Establish a Paper Trail

Always take notes, documenting major points of all conversations with government and school officials.

This includes casual, in person conversations with social workers as well as ALL telephone conversations. All key points of discussion must be written down in your notes including the date and time of the discussion. This includes what was agreed upon, as well as what was not agreed upon.

Then the notes should be used to write a letter recapping the substance and content of the conversation. This letter must then be mailed or faxed to the person with whom you had the conversation. In addition, a copy must be kept in your file (see section on the icci game).

Why?

It is important to formalize the interaction between you and Government officials. In addition, everyone is put on notice that they must closely adhere to their responsibilities, regulations and laws., Furthermore, they must then consider the paper trail you have created. This lets everyone know that the interaction can become public and that any abuses of power and authority can be formally appealed and/or publicized.

In other words, they canit use discretion unfairly under the cloak of secrecy.

2. Submit all Requests in Writing

All your requests for your child must be submitted formally in writing with a copy included in your file and a copy, if necessary, sent to their immediate superiors.

3. Set Deadlines for Action

All formal requests for action must have a reasonable deadline set for that action. If no action or response is received by the deadline you have set (two weeks for example), then you will interpret the lack of response as a formal declination (a formal NO) of your requests.

Why Set Deadlines?

When bureaucrats do not want to do something, they will stall by ignoring you and your request. (As an aside, in the study of the bureaucracy, this is known as ithe power to do nothingi). They can string you along for years. When you have determined that the person you are interacting with is not inclined to help you or is not dealing in good faith, then you must take the initiative and formally label his/her behavior as obstructionist and de facto as a declination (a NO to your requests). This allows you to move to the next level of authority on your timetable to present your case. This takes the power to do nothing away from the bureaucrat with whom you are dealing. Simple stated, a bureaucrat who stalls and does nothing becomes irrelevant (use your invisible spray) and you move on to the next level of authority.

How to icci?

A cc. is a copy of your letter sent to someone other than the person you are writing. You put the cc. at the bottom left-hand corner of your letter followed by 2 spaces and the name of the person or people to whom you want to send a copy of the letter.

Who to icci to?

Sometimes it is best not to icci at all, especially in the early stages of the relationship (for example, your first letter to a social worker requesting assistance). This gives them the opportunity to do the right thing and does not present you as an overly combative person. When you start to run into problems, it is a good idea to send the icci to the 2 immediate superiors of the person you are having problems with. We do not recommend icciing all the way up the chain of command, since you want to give them a chance to solve the problem at the local level.

Why send a icci copy?

The reason for playing the icci game is that you want your interactions with the official to be known to his superior and possibly to other organizations so that 1) their action or inaction becomes a matter of record and 2) the individual knows he is being monitored. This helps minimize abuses of power and authority and helps encourage the official to meet their obligations and do the right thing.

What is the sequence of letters?

Find out the chain of command of the particular bureaucracy you are battling.

TOP

Minister
Deputy Minister
Children’s Ministry’s local region chain of command, all the way down to the District Supervisor
and Social Worker
Contacts can be found at the government directory: http://www.dir.gov.bc.ca/

BOTTOM

Start at the bottom and climb. At the Regional Operating Officer (ROO) level (once you have been declined) you have to decide whether to jump up to the top, threaten and then go to the media, or both. A word of wisdom: DO NOT BLUFF. If you are not willing to go all the way, they will ‘smell’ this. You must be prepared to take it right up to the Minister and beyond.

Documentation from Experts:

In your arsenal to fight for your child, it is wise to get his/her pediatrician and/or psychiatrist to write a letter on your childis behalf. In addition, any other experts who know your child and are sympathetic to what you are trying to do should become involved.

When to hire a lawyer?

If money is not an issue, you can hire a lawyer when you get to the area manager level. Make sure that you have a paper trail so the lawyer has something to work with. Also, have the lawyer give F.E.A.T. of B.C. a call, and we will send him/her information that will help.

If money is an issue (as it is for most of us running autism treatment programs), you might want to hire a lawyer once you have been turned down by the Minister.

How to hire a lawyer?

The type of lawyer needed is a litigator, or trial lawyer. S/he does not need to be an expert in autism, or special needs; s/he needs to be experienced in suing governments, and enjoys being in court. Word of mouth is a good way to find a lawyer.

Topic

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Yesterday, (October 5, 2018) a Liberal MP made a statement in in the House of Commons in which he referred to the opening of a new “South Asian Autism Awareness Centre”, at which apparently the Prime Minister was in attendance a month ago.  What an excellent opportunity to highlight the needs of the community and lobby the PM.  Unfortunately, I did a search on “autism” on the PM’s website to see if there was any speech or press release relating to the event. The result was “No results”.   Did the local, provincial or national autism organizations take advantage of the opportunity to try to educate the PM at this event, or was it just a photo op?  The centre’s FB page has a picture of the PM front and centre (https://www.facebook.com/thesaaac), but I can’t find any indication of whether there was any serious discussion of public policy at the event.

“Autism

<b>Mr. Gary Anandasangaree (Scarborough—Rouge Park, Lib.): </b>

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate SAAAC, the South Asian Autism Awareness Centre, located in Scarborough for its work in the past 10 years helping hundreds of young people on the autism spectrum and their families. One out of 66 children born in Canada is on the spectrum. However, services to support these children are inadequate. SAAAC started in the basement of the house of its executive director, Geetha Moorthy, and has developed into the state-of-the-art facility it is today. The new centre came together due to her visionary leadership and the enormous support of retiring Toronto city councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker. Last month, I was proud to join our Prime Minister in opening the centre.

As we celebrate National Autism Awareness Month and Thanksgiving this weekend, I just want to say how thankful I am to have SAAAC in our community, for all of its volunteers, its staff, champions and a group of incredible parents who advocate and support their children. To the young people who are served by SAAAC, I want to affirm that we will continue to support their reaching their full potential. I thank them for inspiring us.”

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Just wondering….supposing your child is two years old and just stopped using the twenty odd words he previously acquired, and your doctor advised you to get on the waiting list for provincial autism screening, how long do you think would be a reasonable timeframe to wait for an appointment with the specialist?  Three months? Six maybe?

In this news story, one mother indicates she was shocked by the wait time to get a diagnosis. Shocked!  So….how long is it? 18 to 24 months.  Where?  London, Ontario, (population about 390,000). What a disgrace.  And what does the federal government do in response to our community’s repeated requests for help?  Fund a website and anti-stigma campaign.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/london/wait-times-ontario-autism-program-screening-1.4847170

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Here is an interesting tale of a concept hatched by an MP which went through the usual “now I’m in opposition and it’s important” to “now I’m a Cabinet Minister but the idea won’t move”.

Back in 2010 Kristy Duncan (Liberal) tabled a Private Members’ Bill to create an Alzheimer’s Office within the Public Health Agency of Canada.  The Bill was retabled by her in 2013. Back then she was in opposition.  Now is the Minister of Science and Sport.  Science! What happened to the Bill?  Well, in 2016 NDP MP Brian Masse tabled Bill C-249 with the same title “An Act to amend the Public Health Agency of Canada Act (National Alzheimer Office)”.

The Bill is an interesting read, especially if you change the word “Alzheimer” for “autism”.  Take a look:

The Bill’s Preamble is:

<b>“Preamble</b>

Whereas Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia are progressive, degenerative diseases of the brain that produce impairment of thought processes and memory and changes in abilities and behaviour, erode independence and eventually cause death;

Whereas, in Canada, there are more than 500,000 persons living with Alzheimer’s disease or other forms of dementia;

Whereas, as Canada’s population ages, the number of Canadians diagnosed with these diseases is expected to double within a generation;

And whereas research, early diagnosis and support for treatment can lead to positive health outcomes for persons with Alzheimer’s disease or other forms of dementia and can have a positive impact on the family and friends who provide care for them;

Now, therefore, Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons of Canada, enacts as follows:”

 

So what does the Bill enact?  First, the creation of an Alzheimer’s office within the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC).

And what would be the mandate of the office?

“<b>Mandate</b>

<b>(3) </b>The mandate of the Office is to accomplish the following:

<b>(a) </b>develop and implement a national plan to address all aspects of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia;

<b>(b) </b>make recommendations to the Minister on ways to strengthen Canada’s capacity to care for and deliver programs to persons with Alzheimer’s disease or other forms of dementia;

<b>(c) </b>convene a round table of persons interested in matters respecting Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia; and

<b>(d) </b>support the Minister in his or her efforts to coordinate, with international bodies, the Canadian contribution to the fight against Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia.”

 

And what would this “national plan” be about? The Bill goes on to state the following about how it is to be developed, what its purpose is, and what its content should be:

 

“<b>National plan</b>

<b>12.</b><b>‍</b><b>2 (1) </b>The national plan is developed in cooperation with representatives of the provincial and territorial governments responsible for health, health care professionals and other caregivers, basic and clinical researchers, and advocacy groups with an interest in Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia.

 

<b>Purpose</b>

<b> </b>

<b>(2) </b>The purpose of the plan is to set out specific national objectives in order to improve the situation of persons living with Alzheimer’s disease or other forms of dementia, to improve diagnostic and treatment capabilities and to decrease the burden of these diseases on Canadian society.

 

<b>Content</b>

<b> </b>

<b>(3) </b>The plan shall include measures

<b>(a) </b>to accelerate the discovery and development of treatments that would prevent, halt or reverse the course of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia;

<b>(b) </b>to coordinate research in clinical populations while ensuring the inclusion in this research of populations at higher risk for Alzheimer’s disease or other forms of dementia as well as of those least likely to receive care;

<b>(c) </b>to disseminate emerging clinical diagnostic and treatment guidelines based on new research;

<b>(d) </b>to establish and disseminate best practices for improving the quality of life of persons with Alzheimer’s disease or other forms of dementia and supporting health care professionals and other caregivers;

<b>(e) </b>to develop and disseminate information on the importance of prevention, early intervention and management of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia to health care professionals and other caregivers as well as to the general public;

<b>(f) </b>to encourage greater investment in all areas of research on Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia; and

<b>(g) </b>to increase the availability of specialists — including geriatricians, neurologists, psychiatrists and advanced practice nurses — with specialized knowledge of Alzheimer’s disease and other forms of dementia and to make the best use of those resources through interprofessional collaboration.”

 

The Bill adds another section about annual reporting:

 

<b>“Annual report</b>

<b> </b>

<b>12 (1) </b>The Chief Public Health Officer shall, within six months after the end of each fiscal year, submit a report to the Minister on the state of public health in Canada <u>and on the effectiveness of the national plan referred to in section 12.</u><u>‍</u><u>2, including any recommendations regarding the implementation of the plan</u>.”

 

I wonder if Mike Lake or Senator Munson or any other speaker at the autism awareness rallies ever considered using this Bill as a model for a Bill that would result in the creation of an autism office in PHAC and a corresponding “National Autism Plan”?  Any chance that the national autism organizations like CASDA or Autism Canada or Autism Speaks will refer to this Bill and draft a model based on it?  Why not? 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

For the past couple of years Senator Munson has, on occasion, suggested that some programs that the federal government has put in place are good “social infrastructure” building blocks and that the government needs to build upon them.  He often referred to the creation of the RDSP and the “Ready, Willing and Able” employment program for persons with disabilities (http://readywillingable.ca/).  Unfortunately, it is hard to “build on foundations” when the foundations keep sinking into quicksand or melting away, isn’t it?  In yesterday’s Senate Debates (October 2, 2018) Senator Munson asked a question of a Minister who entered the Senate, and mentioned that there have been cuts to “Ready, Willing and Able” program funding (surprise!) and that the program has stopped operating in some provinces (surprise again!).  Well, well….What could justify such a funding cut by the Liberals?  Could it be that it was because it was a program put in place by the previous Conservative government (which automatically makes it a bad program unworthy of continued funding?). And what are the Liberals going to do?  Replace it with anything?  Perhaps create another website?  Note the answer of the Minister: that’s not my department, but never fear, we Liberals want every Canadian to be able to participate in society, bla, bla.  And just how does cutting the funding that helped disabled people find employment help them to participate? One step forward, one step back, one step forward, one step….you get the picture.
<h2 id=”50″>”Ministry of Families, Children and Social Development</h2>

<h3 id=”51″>Ready, Willing and Able—Program Support</h3>

<b>Hon. Jim Munson: </b>I have a question for the minister. Thank you for pitching in today because there are other issues besides NAFTA. There are issues of children’s rights, issues of autism; there are issues that matter to all of us here.

Minister Duclos, you are Minister of Families, Children and Social Development. You know that an incredible program called Ready, Willing and Able has been underway for a couple of years now in which the federal government is involved in employing adults across the country. There are private sector people involved. There are a couple of thousand people who would not be working, who would be at home playing a video game, but now are actively working in companies like Shoppers and Costco. This program has been supported by the autism community. There have been cutbacks recently, causing it to be phased out. I’m very disappointed to see that. For example, the cutting of funding has meant services offered to Canadians with disabilities have come to a halt in Manitoba, Newfoundland and Labrador, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, P.E.I., Saskatchewan and Yukon. It remains active in only six other provinces.

I know there will be a budget submission, but this program, which began under a previous government, has been so successful. Minister, it is about inclusion. I implore you and your cabinet colleagues to take another good look at this to see how well it is working. I hope I can get a clear answer on that today from you. Thank you, minister.

<b>Hon. Jean-Yves Duclos, P.C., M.P., Minister of Families, Children and Social Development: </b> Thank you so much for your warm welcome. I’m slightly sorry for the fact that I’m part of the disappointment of being with you today. I know you were expecting someone else. I’m still very pleased with your reception. I’ll make sure that my colleague understands that he is very much welcome to this house, and he will be looking forward to answering all of the other important questions that I will not be able to address myself.

I’m also pleased and proud to hear voices from this chamber on issues that matter to me very dearly, in particular the program you mentioned, which is not part of my department but is part of my colleague’s departmental responsibility for people with disabilities. And it has a slight connection to training and participation in our society, which are indeed very important parts of our mandate as a government. We are very much focused on two things: first, to make sure that every Canadian has a chance to participate to the fullness of his or her ability in the development of our society and our economy; and, second, to benefit fairly from the benefits of that growth and social development.

So I’m very pleased to hear that, and I will make sure that my colleague understands your questions and concerns.”

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Here we go again!  Another autism website!  In the 20 odd years of the internet’s existence we have witnessed a mushrooming growth of websites, and that includes websites relating to autism. As you may recall, on February 28 this year, the federal government’s budget announced the contribution of $10.9 million to two autism organizations that were going to create a new, really good and useful, autism website.  As I recall, one of the officials from the Miriam Foundation in Montreal was quoted on a TV newsclip as suggesting that “there’s nothing out there” and this new website was going to be a place where Canadians from coast to coast could get all the information they needed about autism.  Today I looked at the “news” section of the Miriam Foundation’s website, and the most recent news item is the February 28, 2018, news release about the budget provision.

However, it now appears that the government-sponsored website may be obsolete before it is even launched.

On September 25 (just a few days ago) Autism Speaks issued a press release which stated the following:

“Autism Speaks Canada Launches Connect, Canada’s First Virtual Platform to Engage and Inform the Autism Community

TORONTO, Sept. 25, 2018 /CNW/ – Autism Speaks Canada today launched the country’s first national, multi-faceted virtual platform that is intended to revolutionize the way people in the autism community interact with each other.  Designed to bring the community together, Autism Speaks Canada Connect will foster collaboration, improve navigation, consolidate resources and provide mentorship opportunities like never before.

“What began as a desire to consolidate information and resources has evolved into something bigger.  Regardless of age, stage, need or geographic location, Connect’s comprehensive offering has the potential to service every Canadian impacted by autism,” said Jill Farber, executive director of Autism Speaks Canada.  “I look forward to Connect being embraced by individuals, families, clinical professionals, service providers, researchers, service organizations and military families, from coast to coast to coast.” “

The new website is here:  https://connect.autismspeaks.ca/home

Instead of so many people in our community spending so much time, energy and money creating websites that may be duplicative, how about just one website and spending some surplus resources to hire a full-time professional lobbyist to work in Ottawa campaigning for a National Autism Strategy that would see the inclusion of autism treatment in Medicare?

Years ago Ralph Boren wrote a manual for civil servants titled “When in doubt, mumble!”.   As technology evolves and changes human behavior, I suspect any updated edition would be titled something like “When in doubt, create a website!”

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Well, this week appears to be Senator Art Eggleton’s last week in the Senate. He is turning 75 and is required to vacate his seat and take a pension.  As you may recall, Senator Eggleton chaired the committee that created the 2007 “Pay Now or Pay Later” report on funding for autism treatment.

On Wednesday this week there were a number of tributes paid to him in the Senate and he replied with an expression of thanks.  The speeches were full of elaborations on what a great person the Senator is and outstanding his accomplishments.  How many times did the word “autism” come up?  Once.  And it was not even in his final speech. Instead, another Senator made reference to some “groundbreaking reports”, including one “on autism”.

In his final speech Senator Eggleton explained that after he joined one of the Senate committees, he “… decided to dedicate my time, energy and passion to social justice and health care issues, particularly the needs of our most vulnerable citizens.”

Question: after the 2007 “Pay Now or Pay Later” report, did Senator Eggleton do or say anything relating to autism?  Did he organize or participate in any activities either behind the scenes or in front of the scenes to actually keep the recommendations of the report on the hot plate and put pressure on the government to do something?  I know my memory does occasionally fail me, but since 2007 I don’t recall him making any speeches dedicated to the topic (either in or out of Parliament).  I don’t recall him attending any “awareness” rallies.  Maybe he did.  Of course I don’t know what goes on behind the curtains on Parliament Hill, but I do know this: since 2007 neither Senator Eggleton, nor anyone else, ever said to me that Senator Eggleton was doing something and that the community should contact him to offer support in one way or another, etc.  Perhaps that’s why he did not utter the word “autism” in his final speech.  Some champions make efforts and are successful in sustaining the pressure and try to keep the momentum going.  Such champions are hard to come by.

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

From House of Commons Hansard, Wed. Sept. 26, 2018:

“Autism

<b>Mr. Francesco Sorbara (Vaughan—Woodbridge, Lib.): </b>

Mr. Speaker, Temple Grandin, an individual with autism and an advocate for those on the spectrum, once said, “I am different, not less.”

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to acknowledge two remarkable women in my riding of Vaughan—Woodbridge, Ellen Contardi and Loredana Presutto, who desire to make a difference for children with autism and their families. Like Temple Grandin, they believe that, “There needs to be a lot more emphasis on what a child can do instead of what he cannot do.” In just three short years, Waves of Changes for Autism has raised community awareness and provided much-needed financial resources to families.

Tomorrow evening, I will join more than 1,000 guests at the third annual Waves of Changes for Autism gala. Today is also Gender Equality Week.

I urge my colleagues to join me in thanking Ellen and Loredana for their vision to help children on the spectrum achieve their full potential.”

If you visit the website of this organization (https://www.wavesofchanges.ca/apply-for-funding/), it seems that they try to raise funds and then distribute them to families who need financial assistance for “children’s therapies and specialized programs”.  One the page where they provide information on applying for funds they state “<i>Waves of Changes for Autism is not</i> affiliated with and does not endorse, any specific organization or agency that provides care, treatment, and/or related services to persons with developmental disorders and accordingly we cannot guarantee or endorse the accuracy of the information provided by those agencies and/or organizations.”  However, the list of the things they fund begins with “ABA/IBI”. Curiously, they don’t seem to repeat those acronyms anywhere else on their website (apart from one “testimonial”) and they don’t spell out what those letters stand for or why ABA/IBI is so important.  Nonetheless, this seems to be a charity that raises money to help families with accessing treatment in the private sector, and that’s certainly an endeavor worthy of commendation.

I wonder whether any of the politicians in the House who heard about this organization and their fund-raising events ever wondered why was it necessary to fundraise for treatment that the courts determined many moons ago was “medically necessary”? Did any of the politicians in the House wonder whether there were any other diseases or disorders that were as prevalent (1 in 66) in Canada for which charities and families had to engage in fundraising activities because Medicare ignored them and whatever programs are offered by social services departments and school boards, etc. were clearly inadequate”? Did Mike Lake get up and take advantage of the obvious opportunity to tell the House that what this charity was doing was wonderful, but in a rich, developed and otherwise civilized society like Canada the costs of the treatment should be covered by our already-existing and decades-old public health insurance system and that this discrimination should cease and steps should be taken to ensure that treatment costs are covered by Medicare so that such charities and fundraising activities (as if families with children with autism don’t have enough on their plates already) would be obsolete and unnecessary? Nope.  It is possible that some other politicians will join Mr. Sorbara at the gala, enjoy a nice dinner, have some wine, congratulate the organizers on a job well done, and wish them continued success.  The way things are framed sometimes just misses the big picture and significance or implications of what is going on.  So much for “awareness”.

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Well, well…freedom of speech strikes again. Hooray!

https://www.cbc.ca/news/<wbr />politics/charity-political-<wbr />audits-cra-lebouthillier-<wbr />farha-poverty-environmental-<wbr />gray-liberal-1.4750295

So maybe now some autism organizations can finally move beyond “awareness”.

 

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

Further to the reference in the House of Commons debates yesterday about Mike Lake talking at some autism symposium, there is this interesting summary at the following page:

On Route to Adulthood: A Special Needs Information Fair

The description of Mike Lake’s contribution to the symposium is as follows: “National Autism Advocate MP Mike Lake was in attendance and provided an engaging presentation on his personal connection to Autism.”

Any parent of a child with autism has a “personal connection” to autism.  We can all meet and talk about our children and offer encouraging words of support.  But from a politician, I expect more.  Especially one who has himself described as a “national autism advocate”.  An MP with a personal connection to autism and with 12 years experience in the House (nine years on the government side) should be able to talk about what is needed and describe a vision of government public policy that is responsive to the needs of our community. He should be able to describe what was done in the recent past to improve public policy in this regard, and describe in concrete terms the next steps of what needs to be done to improve the lives of our children. He should be able to outline what he is agitating for and hopefully give us confidence that there is someone on the Hill who knows what our needs are and who is championing our cause.  Instead, it seems that he did what he always does on World Autism Awareness Day and related rallies come up: talk about his son and how great his son is and how much he loves him, etc.  We get it Mike, we get it.  Can we get some action now? Can you say “Medicare for autism now”? Try it.  Just once.

[Andrew Kavchak]

Hi Folks,

First, regarding the Liberal Party of Canada’s Medicare for autism treatment resolution, you may recall that a few posts ago I indicated that the policy group within the party that was working on a report relating to the resolution and its implementation had delivered their report to the caucus liaison MP, Ken Hardie.  Well, a few weeks ago I sent his office an email asking about the status of the report and what does he plan to do with it.  And his reply was…..no reply.  At least, none yet.  I’m not holding my breath and I have given up on getting a reply from the guy. Although one of the report’s authors wrote to me saying that Ken Hardie is “very supportive”, I don’t have any evidence to back that up, and the silence (really, how long does it take to reply by email to say something like “we’re in receipt of the report and are currently reviewing it with a view to determining next steps” or “yeah, we got the report, we’re busy with other pressing issues and this ain’t one of them”?) is somewhat indicative of the contrary.

Second, the word “autism” came up in the House of Commons 14 times yesterday (Monday, September 24, 2018).  The context was a debate regarding Bill C-81, titled “An Act to ensure a barrier-free Canada”.  This Bill is worth exploring…I have not studied it yet, but there is a possibility that there may be some potential benefits to our community in this Bill.  The Bill’s “Summary” states the following:

“SUMMARY

This enactment enacts the Accessible Canada Act in order to enhance the full and equal participation of all persons, especially persons with disabilities, in society. This is to be achieved through the progressive realization, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, of a Canada without barriers, particularly by the identification, removal and prevention of barriers.

Part 1 of the Act establishes the Minister’s mandate, powers, duties and functions.

Part 2 of the Act establishes the Canadian Accessibility Standards Development Organization and provides for its mandate and structure and its powers, duties and functions.

Part 3 of the Act authorizes the Accessibility Commissioner to provide the Minister with information, advice and written reports in respect of the administration and enforcement of the Act. It also requires the Accessibility Commissioner to submit an annual report on his or her activities under the Act to the Minister for tabling in Parliament.

Part 4 of the Act imposes duties on regulated entities that include the duty to prepare accessibility plans and progress reports in consultation with persons with disabilities, the duty to publish those plans and reports and the duty to establish a feedback process and to publish a description of it.

Part 5 of the Act provides for the Accessibility Commissioner’s inspection and other powers, including the power to make production orders and compliance orders and the power to impose administrative monetary penalties.

Part 6 of the Act provides for a complaints process for, and the awarding of compensation to, individuals that have suffered physical or psychological harm, property damage or economic loss as the result of — or that have otherwise been adversely affected by — the contravention of provisions of the regulations.

Part 7 of the Act provides for the appointment of the Chief Accessibility Officer and sets out that officer’s duties and functions, including the duty to advise the Minister in respect of systemic or emerging accessibility issues.

Part 8 of the Act authorizes the Governor in Council to make regulations, including regulations to establish accessibility standards and to specify the form of accessibility plans and progress reports. It also provides, among other things, for the designation of the week starting on the last Sunday in May as National AccessAbility Week.

Part 9 of the Act provides for the application of certain provisions of the Act to parliamentary entities, without limiting the powers, privileges and immunities of the Senate, the House of Commons and the members of those Houses.

Parts 10 and 11 of the Act make related and consequential amendments to certain Acts.”

The purpose section of the Bill states the following:

<h2 lang=”en”>“Purpose of Act</h2>

Purpose

5 The purpose of this Act is to benefit all persons, especially persons with disabilities, through the progressive realization, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, of a Canada without barriers, particularly by the identification and removal of barriers, and the prevention of new barriers, in the following areas:

(a) employment;

(b) the built environment;

(c) information and communication technologies;

(d) the procurement of goods and services;

(e) the delivery of programs and services;

(f) transportation; and

(g) areas designated under regulations made under paragraph 117(1)‍(b).”

Just off the cuff, it seems to me that the decision of provincial governments to not extend Medicare coverage to include autism treatment constitutes prima facie evidence of a “barrier” to “the delivery of programs and services”, but sometimes one should not allow reason or objective and rational thinking to get in the way until one has read the fine print of these government documents.

And so how did the references to autism come up?  Here are some quotes from yesterday’s debate:

<b>“Mr. John Brassard (Barrie—Innisfil, CPC): </b>

Madam Speaker, in my riding of Barrie—Innisfil, I have been dealing with Gloria Noseworthy, who has an organization called the Crossroads Community Centre, which helps adults with autism transition from their younger years into adulthood. We were very fortunate this weekend to have the member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin come to speak at an autism symposium that Ms. Noseworthy had put on.   One of the concerns that was raised among parents of adult children with autism is their ability to access employment. Many of them currently have skill sets that can be applied. For example, it is well known that the member for Edmonton—Wetaskiwin‘s son Jaden works in a library. He does a great job.    How would this legislation help address the concerns of people like Gloria and other parents who have children with autism who are transitioning into adulthood?”

Note: the reference to the “member for Edmonton-Wetashkiwin” is to Mike Lake.   Besides talking about his son Jaden, I wonder what is the likelihood that his speech at this “autism symposium”  included some discussion of public policy and what the federal government should do to help people with autism and an explanation of why his party did not do what he recommends when they were in power, etc.

“<b>Mr. Arif Virani: </b>

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the member opposite’s genuine concern for this important issue. Empowering and unleashing the potential of people who are living with autism as they transition to adulthood is critical, and that is exactly what informs this entire piece of legislation. I would redirect the conversation to what I outlined in my speech about the opportunities fund, which is about ensuring that young people, including people with disabilities, have skills. It is also about matching them with employers who are ready, willing and able to employ such persons but literally do not know how to go about doing so because they do not have the resources at hand. Providing that match is fundamental. For parliamentarians on both side of the floor, it is incumbent upon us to facilitate that kind of matchmaking and unleash this potential, not just for autistic young adults but for all young adults with disabilities.”

Note: don’t you love it when politicians use language such as “…empowering and unleashing the potential of people who are living with autism…is critical…” but won’t dare mention “Medicare coverage for applied behavior analysis treatment for autism”?

Then Diane Finley rose to talk about her party’s accomplishments and made a reference to autism:

“We partnered with the Canadian Association for Community Living on the ready, willing and able initiative to connect people with developmental disabilities with a job. We also invested in expanding vocational training programs for people with autism spectrum disorders.”

Then Kelly McCauley did the same:

“There was over $200 million for labour market agreements for persons with disabilities to assist provinces in approving the employment situation of Canadians with disabilities, and millions of dollars for the ready, willing and able initiative of the Canadian Association for Community Living to connect persons with developmental disabilities with jobs, and millions to support the expansion of vocational training programs for persons with autism spectrum disorder, and on and on.”

He went on to further denounce the current government:

” Who else did the Liberals target in their tax grab? They targeted people suffering from autism and severe mental health disorders. Autism Canada says it is hearing too many stories of people who have had the disability tax credit, sometimes for decades, for their children with autism taken away.”

And he concluded with:

” We have a lot of issues with this legislation, but we do support it. We support the work that we have done in the past toward helping disabled individuals. We continue to do so with our private members’ bills, such as the one put forward by the member for Calgary Shepard and the member for Carleton. Both have produced bills that would show tangible results for the disabled without the resources the government has, whether it be easier access to the disability credit for those who are suffering from autism, diabetes, or mental health disorders, or as my friend from Carleton has put in his bill, that would encourage the disabled to get back to work. His bill would not punish someone by taking away benefits because they had a job. Nothing is better for the dignity of Canadians than having a job.”

And then John Barlow spoke and while outlining how great his party is, he said this:

” We created a working group that was tasked with developing a national autism strategy.”

And he later repeated it again:

“Under the previous Conservative government, we introduced the registered disabilities savings plan, which quickly gave Canadians with disabilities increased financial security. We introduced a new home accessibility tax credit and developed a working group tasked with developing a national autism strategy.”

Note: once again, we are witnessing the revision of history and political myth-making in action.  Mike Lake convinced his party leadership several years ago to put some money into funding the activities of a “working group” that would create a “business plan” or proposal to government for the creation of what they called the “Canadian Autism Partnership”.   If you read the executive summary, the words “national autism strategy” do not show up once.  The working group’s report was delivered after the last federal election when the Liberals were elected.  As this was not their baby, they did not say a word about it in their budget of last year.  So Mike Lake tabled a motion for it to be funded. During the debates we saw Erin O’Toole (a Tory leadership candidate) refer to the CAP project as some sort of “national program”.  Now we see this evolution as the CAP project concept morphs into being about the creation of a “National Autism Strategy”.  And what’s more, in terms of going back and revising historical fact, the storyline now is that the Tories created the working group and “tasked” them with developing a national autism strategy.  Does that mean they will now say the Conservative Party of Canada was in favour of the creation of a national autism strategy and were prepared to implement such a strategy but those rascals in the Liberal Party of Canada are sabotaging their great vision for autism public policy in Canada?  Of course, they did not task them creating a national autism strategy (the working group mandate is outlined at the beginning of their report…just google it).  However, would it be possible for some folks in our community, perhaps some community leaders, to send these two quotes with a request for clarification….if you “tasked” (and funded) a working group with the creation of a national autism strategy, should this be interpreted to mean that the Conservative Party supports the creation of a national autism strategy?  If so, what are you waiting for to present to Canadians your proposal for a National Autism Strategy?

[Author]

Replies