English

Slide 1

Presentation for the Maytree Webinar
February 26, 2009
Michael J. Prince
University of Victoria

Slide 2

Overview

1. The issues
2. Federal programs in place
3. The gaps and risks
4. Three policy options
5. Conclusions
    

Slide 3

SUBMISSION
TO
SENATE SUB-COMMITTEE ON CITIES
THE SENATE OF CANADA

BY

MICHAEL J. PRINCE
LANSDOWNE PROFESSOR OF SOCIAL POLICY
UNIVERSITY OF VICTORIA
mprince@uvic.ca

22 June 2009

23 February 2010

Letter to the Editor
The Globe and Mail

Everyday A New Issue

This month at CCD we have seen it all, ranging from a positive decision by the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal in the Hughes case where CCD had Interested Party status to faxed hate mail as a result of our media work on the Barlagne case. These two very disparate responses to CCD's initiatives, demonstrate the critical importance of the work that our organizations undertake in support of an inclusive and accessible Canada.

3 March 2010

For immediate release

The Council of Canadians with Disabilities (CCD) is pleased that Members of Parliament are back to work. Now the Government of Canada can make good on a commitment made on 3 December 2009: Ratification of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (CRPD).

24 February 2010

For immediate release

Immigration officials contend that paying $5,259 per year for Rachel Barlagne's education would be an excessive burden on Canada, so they are ordering her family to leave Montreal and abandon the life and business they are building in their adopted country.

4 March 2009

TO: All Members of Parliament

RE: Immigration and Disability

CCD seeks to keep you informed on issues of concern to persons with disabilities. In 2008, we forwarded you three articles—a short piece on our National Action Plan on Disability, an overview of our concerns related to the Robert Latimer case and an article highlighting the issue of disability and immigration.

Facts

This appeal focused on the interpretation s. 97(1)(b)(iv) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, which excludes refugee protection from a risk to life caused by the “inability [of a claimant’s country of nationality] to provide adequate health or medical care.”

Facts

Facts

The Applicant applied under the "entrepreneur" category prior to June 2002, and, although he was found to qualify, he was found to be inadmissible, pursuant to s. 38(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act (IRPA). On the basis of medical evidence, the Officer found that Mr. Lee’s health conditions, which included polycystic kidney disease, hypertension, moderate mitral regurgitation and chronic renal failure, would reasonably be expected to cause "excessive demands" on Canada's health services.