"Like the members of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, the Government of Canada is strongly committed to building a more inclusive society; a society in which all Canadians enjoy a high quality of life.
. . .

Recognizing that persons with disabilities have differing needs, and different needs at different stages in their lives, the Government has many programs and initiatives to support its disability commitments. For example, CPP Disability program benefits and the Veterans Disability Pension help eligible Canadians with disabilities and their families meet their income needs; the Employability Assistance for People with Disabilities and the Opportunities Fund help them succeed in the labour market; the Canada Study Grants for students with disabilities provides assistance for post-secondary education; and low-income Canadians with disabilities can receive financial assistance from the Residential Rehabilitation Assistance Program for Persons with Disabilities to modify their homes to improve accessibility and mobility."

http://www.hrdc-drhc.gc.ca/isp/pub/5threport/5thpg2_e.shtml#2

The more idealistic government rhetoric becomes, in its own adoration of alleged listening, studies, policies, guidelines, amendments, collaboration, etc., etc., why is there still so much to be done?

The words shameful and pathetic do not begin to describe bureaucratic conduct. For example, the alleged help to meet income needs is negated by the word "eligible". A disabled person, who is found not eligible, does not benefit in any way, and the long, drawn out appeals process imposes more punitive physical, emotional, economic hardship and harm.

What good is an Opportunities Fund when there is not enough money to fund full access to the program and accommodate special needs? Coincidentally, there is enough money to employ bureaucrats and fund private sector consultants, but not enough for the disabled who the fund is supposed to help.

It does not take a rocket scientist to figure out that increasing barriers to enable disabled persons to benefit is not helpful, not legal, and down right mean spirited. No, it takes a highly educated, well paid bureaucrat, to narrowly interpret the law in such a way that some disabled persons are not only treated differently than others, but that they require appeals process that include supreme court directions to get some, but not all, bureaucrats to obey the law.

This complaint is not about how good or bad a law is, or the need for improvement, but how can a government allow its bureaucracy to break the law and not be held accountable. The issues are not so much what is stated, but what underlies the reason for the studies and reports in the first place. Here in lies what appears to be a major indicator of organized white collar crime issuing from the highest levels of our society.

The fact that appeals are required in order for some disabled persons to benefit indicate that bureaucrats, and their select consultants, continue to collect salaries and fees to produce the alleged reasons for improperly withholding benefits in the first place. The irony is, that the more studies and reports commissioned to discover remedy, apparently only serve to encourage instead of discourage improper or incompetent acts, or failure to act, in bureaucracy.

No matter how competent ministers may be, they rely on the very same bureaucrats to enable their informed decisions. Although these same bureaucrat foxes are caught with feathers in their mouth, they continue to be allowed to guard the chicken coop.

While the election may hold ministers accountable, what measures are in place to hold the bureaucrat accountable? So far the only way to petition for change comes every four years in the form of an election. Therefore, it is imperative to vote for change until a government arrives that can train the foxes to not eat their reason to be.