In Conversation with Madeleine Meilleur

Madeleine Meilleur: Yes, I do.

RC: Prior to your career in politics?

MM: Yes. As a nurse to start with and then I did my law degree and worked in labour relations for some time. Then I was national director of health for Canada Post.

RC: That’s quite varied. In terms of nursing, that sounds like pretty direct service.

MM: Yes. The 14 years I was in nursing, I worked in the delivery room, so it was very specialized. Most of the time, it’s a happy time in the delivery room, but when it’s sad, it’s very sad.

RC: Speaking of being of direct service, it was only a short while ago that I was with you as you announced the closure of the last three institutions for people with developmental disabilities in the province. As you think back on that, how significant was that to you, and why?

MM: It was a real historic moment in Ontario because in the past century that’s the way we used to take care of people with developmental disabilities, starting when they were very young and then for the rest of their lives. That was the way it was. And people were encouraged to do that. If a parent had a developmentally disabled child, they were advised to send them…in Ottawa it was “Send them to Smiths Falls.” There was at one point over thirty-some institutions, large, medium in size, small institutions, across the province. At the time people were referred to as “mentally retarded” or “imbeciles” – you know, labels changed but not for the best. So the process of de-institutionalizing started many years ago, but at the insistence of the parents, because some would much prefer to keep their son or daughter at home. One of the reasons why they were in institutions was because of the recommendation, often of their physician. There was also kind of an embarrassment for the parents to have a disabled child; they
wanted to protect that child from the judgment of the neighbours and communities.  But at one point the parents decided, no, we don’t want to send our sons and daughters [any longer] so we’ll keep them. And then they required assistance from the government, and so the 33 institutions went down and down and down to the three largest, which were still in operation but with a lot smaller number of people. When [the Liberal party] came into power, there were a little over 1,000 people left in the three institutions. There has been a decision taken prior to us to close it completely– by 2012. My predecessor, Minister Pupatello, decided to accelerate that and end institutionalization on March 31, 2009. It was a very historic moment, a big celebration from the developmental disability community and the parents. So we’re very, very proud.

RC: It was really a transition point from the medical model, from the institutional model, to more of a social model, I think.

MM: Exactement. And I wouldn’t say that it was a medical model, because there was not a lot of treatment there. It was more like a residence. Because these people, most of them were not ill, they were just developmentally disabled.

RC: I appreciated being there that day. thought it was a historic event; it had that resonance about it.

MM: Oh, yes. It was very moving and, like I said, I was very humbled to be the minister presiding over the closure. A lot of work had been done before me and to see the improvement of individuals leaving the institution and going into a home-style residence…I cannot say it was always easy because some relatives did object to the closure for various reasons. And you have to understand them. First of all, there were some that didn’t even know they had a brother or a sister in the institution. So imagine, you were 65 years old and someone called you and told you that we’re closing Southwestern and so we would like you to be involved in moving your sister, so-and-so, to a residence. And some knew they were there, especially the parents, and for them they could die in peace because their daughter or son was in an institution and well taken care of and so they didn’t need to worry.

RC: Well, things had to change and they changed, to your credit. Of course, your mandate has gone beyond exclusively that of people with developmental disabilities. You’ve been dealing with disability in a much more general sense, including the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) and setting the standards.

MM: Oh, yes. That’s very, very different.

RC: You have chosen to do a very broad and thorough consultation on the accessibility standards. What was the thinking behind that?

MM: With the consultation? Again, it’s an historic moment in the life of not only Ontario but Canada, to introduce such a piece of legislation. There’s none in any of the provinces. There is, of course, our neighbour to the south. They have the Americans with Disabilities legislation. But here we were the first province out of the gate with that. We want to have it right, and we want to make sure that we answer to the expectations of people with disabilities, including those who have to put the accessibility standards into action. We’re working together along with employers, with the private sector, with government and with the disability community.

RC: I’ve noticed that there really is a strong presence of people with disabilities who are directly involved in the process
.
MM: Fifty per cent of those developing the standards. But it was not like this at the beginning. At the beginning it was onethird from government, one-third from the private sector and one-third from the disability community. But those representing the disability community were very clear. They didn’t feel that they would be able to make a difference because they were in a minority all the time – so they asked us to change our practice, and that’s what we did. We removed the government staff that were there. That made it fifty-fifty. Fifty per cent.

RC: More in keeping with an independent living model.

MM: Yes, and you know what? It worked a lot better after that. And then after the standards were developed we went out for public consultation; then the advice came back and the committee reconvened and looked at the recommendations and made the appropriate adjustments.

RC: Are you happy with the progression?

MM: Very happy. I’m so thankful for all of those who gave their time and knowledge and energy to develop these standards. It’s not completed yet but it’s on the right track.

RC: Are you getting any specific feedback regarding those standards – do you feel they are beginning to work?

MM: All the time. The feedback is that it’s beginning to work. We only have in place the customer service [standard], but the rest is already in progress, in consultation or about to be in place, in the law. But we are not there yet. But from what I have seen, it’s an improvement in the mentality out there, in public opinion. Before it was, “It’s going to be too costly, we cannot afford it,” and – you know, there was more, “Yes, it’s the right thing to do, but where is the money?” And I still hear some of it but I would say it’s 100 per cent better.

RC: Are there comparisons between the AODA and the Human Rights Code? How do they relate to each other in terms of standards?

MM: First of all, right now it’s the HumanRights Code, because there’s no standard except customer service. But we hope thatthe standard will be clear enough and go far enough that the Human Rights Commission will not need to intervene. Because when there is a decision from the Human Rights Commission, it applies to a person, a case. But it’s up to us to render it more generally, to apply it to everyone by introducing it into the standards. Like, for instance, the last decision that they rendered was the fact that public transportation should announce the next stop. Okay?
I can tell you one thing, that it’s going to be in the transportation standard. It’s not going to be “if” and “but” and “when,” it’s going to be there.

RC: That’s great.

MM: And, without yet being in the standard, most of the transit organizations are introducing it. So it’s just to show you that there is a lot of goodwill out there and they want to do the right thing.

RC: My understanding is that following enactment, the legislative process would require a public consultation after three years initially, and then every four after that. Is that the case?

MM: Yes. Soon we’re going to appoint someone who will be responsible to review the legislation and the process that we have been following. But the review will be a lot more telling because then we will have all the standards in place and more experience.

RC: Last year the federal government introduced the Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP). Can you tell us what Ontario has done to support people with disabilities in relationship to the RDSP?

MM: For one, we have put into action with the RDSP that people with disabilities will be able to put up to $200,000 into the RDSP without having any impact on their ODSP [Ontario Disability Support Program benefits].

RC: That’s pretty historic.

MM: Yes, it is. And so for us there is no barrier, no limitation in how quickly they put the amount in. But, of course, the maximum is $200,000 for now.

RC: It occurs to me that this really spells the difference between a prosperity mentality and a poverty mentality amongst people with disabilities. I think the RDSP offers an opportunity to operate more on a financially level playing field to the rest of the population.

MM: You know most of the take-up on the RDSP would be by people who have money, because poor families would not have the money to put in – but, then again, the federal government will provide some matching funds. And, you know, there are generous people in the community, and they may open RDSPs for family members or others.

RC: In general, do you see Ontario as being the leader amongst the Canadian provinces around disability issues? If so, why?

MM: Are we the leader? I would say that we are, so far, in the accessibility file. We’re the first one with the legislation. There instance, who have done a lot of work. They don’t have the legislation but they have done a lot of work. We like to think that we are the leader, and we like this because the issues are very important. We want everybody at their best, and we have to give people with disabilities the tools and the facility to be so. I always say, we started this process when we accepted kids with disabilities into [mainstream] classrooms. So there’s no “class for disabled,” there’s no class for developmentally disabled, they’re all in the same class. So when they graduate they don’t see themselves as disabled. And they want to continue their studies at college and university and go into the workforce. So in order for someone with a physical disability to be able to go to the workforce, they need to have an accessible transportation system; they need to have an office that is accessible; they need to have roads and sidewalks that are accessible. And the parents, also, are very militant about giving their son or daughter the same opportunity as others who may not be disabled.

RC: Right. They’re all people.

MM: They’re all people and this government wants everyone at their best, so we have all sorts of programs to support those with disabilities; to get a job and to keep a job, or to become reinstated in the workforce. Many of those with developmental disabilities also have jobs. And they work. They do work that is within their capacities…

RC: But the idea is for them to reach their individual potential.

MM: Exactement.

RC: That’s pretty much the questions I had for you. Abilities Magazine – 80,000 readers. Is there anything further that you would like to tell our readers?

MM: I think what I wanted to add – first of all, thanks to Premier McGuinty, because it takes leadership to move in this direction. I’m speaking here about accessibility and legislation. And even though we’re going through an economic downturn, we’re not putting the accessibility standard on ice and saying, ‘Let’s review it when the economy will be better.’ I’m very thankful about his leadership as Ontario will be a better place.
And not just Ontario. Other provinces are looking at what we’re doing and I’m sure that a lot of them, if not all of them, will follow. We’ve already received a few delegations from other provinces and other countries about what we’re doing here.  I was speaking at a conference in Europe in the fall and they see Ontario as a real leader. Municipalities, too, are very good partners, as well as the private sector, so I’m very encouraged to see that; there is a shift in the thinking and receptivity as a result of this legislation.

RC: Madame Minister, thank you.

To read more articles about social policy and disabilities, please visit our website at www.abilities.ca.