Fast Talk on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Canada

Summary and key takeaways from the experts

Acknowledging ESC Rights:

• There is an ongoing failure in Canada to take economic, social and cultural (ESC) rights seriously, to understand ESC rights as human rights, and to implement ESC rights in a meaningful way. 
• Governments at all levels are generally resistant to acknowledging and remedying systemic discrimination issues relating to ESC rights. 
• Courts and tribunals have similarly been reluctant to interpret and apply the law in a way that is inclusive of ESC rights. 
• It is essential to think of the realization of ESC rights as being a key component of the right to substantive equality. 

Accountability and Advocacy:

• There is a lack of standardization and public reporting of data on issues related to ESC rights. 
• It is imperative for the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) to think about how its existing powers can be used in a dynamic way to fill gaps in research, coordinate with civil society, and hold focused inquiries and consultations that will give profile to groups and issues that don’t regularly receive such attention.
• In order to hold Canada accountable, the CHRC can play a role in monitoring and evaluating the absence of legal provisions and protections related to ESC rights in Canada. 
• The CHRC can improve access to justice by constructing and bringing forward cases of systemic inequality linked to socioeconomic marginalization and disadvantage, as well as advocating for an inclusive human rights paradigm. 

Coordination:

• The coordination of strategies, programs and spending between federal-provincial-territorial (FPT) governments is crucial to solving any issues pertaining to ESC rights.
• In order to help move an ESC-rights agenda forward in Canada, the CHRC could play a convening role by bringing together civil society and government actors. 

Collaboration and Engagement: 

• One of the most effective ways for the CHRC to both show its commitment to and give a voice to ESC rights is to meaningfully engage with people who are experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. 
• The CHRC should develop collaborative relationships with various provincial and territorial commissions to ensure that issues do not fall through jurisdictional cracks.
• The CHRC should broaden the way in which it engages with communities by using different media channels and various forms of art. 

Structural Reform and Legislative Change:

• Structural and institutional reform may be necessary to ensure that systemic ESC rights issues can be effectively claimed in Canada. 
• Legislative amendments to the Canadian Human Rights Act (CHRA), such as including “social condition” as a prohibited ground of discrimination and including specific socioeconomic rights, may provide greater protection for individuals. 

Short, Medium and Long-Term Goals:

• The CHRC can consider setting a number of short, medium and long-term goals. Short-term goals include engaging in the Poverty Reduction Strategy and speaking out; medium-term goals include constructing cases and conducting an inquiry on the costs of over-incarceration; and long-term goals include legislative change and monitoring.

Background 

The Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) has identified economic, social and cultural rights as a key area of concern requiring further knowledge development. As part of this exercise, the CHRC hosted a Fast Talk on economic, social and cultural rights in Canada to help frame, explore and refresh its thinking on this issue. 

A “Fast Talk” is a mini-roundtable consultation that brings together a small group of experts via teleconference on a given subject. 

The experts invited to the Fast Talk on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in Canada were asked to answer the following four policy questions in writing ahead of time: 

1. What systemic changes, remedies or solutions are most needed now, to improve economic, social and cultural rights for disadvantaged individuals in Canada? 
2. What do you see as the CHRC’s role in these solutions? What practical tools or strategies would you see as most helpful?
3. What role can the CHRC play with respect to positive economic and social rights, and ensuring that Canada lives up to its international human rights obligations? 
4. As we move forward, what approaches or strategies are key to ensuring successful CHRC engagement with individuals facing economic and social disadvantage in Canada?

The written responses from the experts were compiled and distributed to both the experts and CHRC staff in advance of the Fast Talk discussion. The CHRC and experts then participated in a 3 hours teleconference on April 30, 2018, to discuss and elaborate on the written responses. The Fast Talk was moderated by Alex Neve, Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada and Tabatha Tranquilla, Senior Policy Advisor at the CHRC. Key CHRC staff involved in economic, social and cultural rights-related issues were in attendance as observers during the Fast Talk, both in person and through teleconference. 

Expert participants 

The following experts participated in the Fast Talk (see Appendix for biographies): 

• Alex Neve (Co-moderator), Secretary General, Amnesty International Canada
• Neil Belanger, Executive Director, British Columbia Aboriginal Network on Disability Society
• Shelagh Day, Director, Poverty and Human Rights Centre, and President, Canadian Human Rights Reporter
• Leilani Farha, UN Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, and Executive Director, Canada Without Poverty
• Anthony Morgan, Lawyer, Falconers LLP 
• Bruce Porter, Executive Director, Social Rights Advocacy Centre 

Fast talk discussion

Opening thoughts and key points

“Many of us feel it is nothing short of disgraceful, that governments – federal, provincial and territorial – have for so long, been so intent on giving short shrift to economic, social and cultural rights and really treating them as second class rights in so many respects.” – Expert Participant 

Second Class Rights:

Many of the experts suggested that the ongoing failure to take ESC rights seriously is one of the most pervasive human rights shortcomings that Canada faces. This failure has been long-standing and has a direct and substantial impact on many individuals and communities, particularly given the intersecting and overlapping nature of ESC rights with so many other human rights issues. The participants characterized this experience as one of ESC rights being treated as “second class rights”. It was further noted that the problem of exclusion of ESC rights has created a significant gap in Canada’s human rights paradigm, with many of the most marginalized and disadvantaged members of equality seeking groups are excluded as a result. Experts stated that in order for ESC rights to be taken seriously, understood as human rights, and implemented in a meaningful way, a cultural shift must occur across the country.

Systemic Discrimination:

Experts noted that ESC rights are at the very heart of everyone’s daily life and often encompass issues of systemic discrimination affecting the most disadvantaged and marginalized groups in Canada. It was suggested that, despite this reality, governments at all levels are generally resistant to policy and legislative solutions to remedy systemic discrimination issues relating to ESC rights. Courts and tribunals have similarly been reluctant to interpret and apply the law in a way that is inclusive of ESC rights. For instance, despite the recent decision from the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal regarding the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada case, which was regarded by experts as a new and precedent-setting way of dealing with systemic discrimination, courts and tribunals still face difficulty in acknowledging and remedying issues of systemic discrimination where they are tied to poverty and socioeconomic disadvantage. Therefore, it was noted in the written responses that the resistance by government and courts and tribunals to ensure a proportionate response to the needs of marginalized and disadvantaged groups could be consistently articulated as a form of discrimination. 

Substantive Equality: 

The failure to implement comprehensive strategies to ensure the equal enjoyment of various rights – including to adequate housing, food, income security, health care and education – has had and continues to have discriminatory effects on protected groups who are disproportionately in need of them. Experts emphasized the importance of thinking about ESC rights as a key component of the right to substantive equality. Where socioeconomic disadvantage is viewed through this lens, failures to address this disadvantage can be argued to be a form of adverse-effect discrimination against protected groups. 

Data Collection:

One expert stated that before a meaningful conversation about the rates of poverty, unemployment, child welfare apprehension and education can be had, it is imperative to recognize that Canada has a very serious problem with the way it collects and publicly reports data related to these issues. Of particular concern is the lack of disaggregated race-based data. Because this information is not collected in a systematic way, it often leads to debates about methodology or the veracity of the statistics that are being reported by different sources.  

Specific Groups:

It was acknowledged that issues relating to the realization of ESC rights are intersectional and cross all equality seeking movements; however, some experts gave specific mention to certain groups experiencing socioeconomic neglect. For instance, experts discussed the racialization and gendered nature of poverty. One expert mentioned that there is a structural inequality problem for women in Canada, where indicators like income and wage-gap have remained relatively the same for the past forty years. In addition, racialized women, women with disabilities and Indigenous women remain at the very bottom of those indicators. One expert noted that the violence towards Indigenous women and girls in Canada will continue until issues related to socioeconomic disadvantage are addressed, as there is a connection between the poverty, social disadvantage and marginalization of Indigenous women and girls, and the violence that they experience. Another expert discussed the history and legacy of enslavement of people of African descent and how this has shaped African Canadian outcomes, including issues of poverty within African Canadian communities. 

Relationships and Coordination:

The coordination of strategies, programs and spending between federal, provincial and territorial governments is crucial to solving any issues pertaining to ESC rights. In addition, the relationship between federal, provincial and territorial governments and Indigenous peoples is fundamental when addressing ESC rights. One expert noted that there is a lack of realistic partnership, trust building and engagement between governments and Indigenous peoples, and that the government often takes on a reactive role rather than a proactive one. This lack of partnership is often reflected in the policies that are developed – without meaningful consultation with those who are most affected – by individuals with little to no working knowledge of the lived experience of constituents that these policies are meant to affect. As a result, the policies that are put in place often increase the barriers that Indigenous peoples and other marginalized groups face. Therefore, it was stated that a new and trusting relationship or partnership is essential in moving forward. 

What the CHRC can do now - Under its current law and mandate - To give a voice to ESC rights 

“The encounter of the CHRC with this subject is an encounter with three of the toughest things that we have to deal with in human rights in Canada. It’s a very serious and difficult venture that the CHRC is taking on here and I applaud it. I think it’s enormously important, but I don’t want to go into it thinking that we’re facing something easy. We’re not.” – Expert Participant

Existing Powers:

It was suggested that the CHRC has existing powers that are somewhat underutilized. For instance, the CHRC has the power to hold inquiries or consultations, to make special reports to Parliament, to conduct research, and to initiate and intervene in complaints. It was stated that all of these powers are extremely important, and it is imperative for the CHRC to think about how these existing powers can be used in a dynamic way to fill gaps in research, better coordinate with civil society, and hold focused inquiries and consultations that will give profile to groups and issues that don’t regularly receive such attention. The CHRC’s ability to make special reports to Parliament was discussed as a particularly important way for the CHRC to give profile to issues or situations that it considers to be of national importance. One expert suggested that the CHRC could produce such a report on the dimensions of social and economic disadvantage in Canada, and in doing so, send a clear public message that the current state of ESC rights in Canada can no longer be the status quo. 

Monitoring and Evaluation:

Canada continues to face a lack of accountability in regard to the absence of certain provisions and protections related to ESC rights. To address this lack of accountability, it was suggested that the CHRC should play a role in monitoring and evaluating the recommendations related to ESC rights that emanate from international human rights mechanisms. Currently, there is no consistent monitoring or evaluation done by the CHRC on what issues Canada hasn’t followed up on, nor does the CHRC regularly call for answers from Canada on a particular issue or work with community members or organizations to raise these concerns. It was stated that placing this responsibility solely on civil society organizations is a lot to ask; the CHRC could play both a supporting and complementary role in this respect. 

Education:

Experts expressed the view that there is a lack of understanding at both the political level and bureaucratic level about what ESC rights are and what it means to effectively exercise these rights in Canada. It was suggested that the CHRC could play a role in providing awareness-raising and educational activities at various levels of government. In addition, it was suggested that greater public awareness and education on what ESC rights are for communities and individuals on the ground would help to create greater social and public consciousness around these issues. Creating opportunities not only to educate, but to be educated by these communities will also create mutual understanding, demonstrate commitment to representing and empowering the community, and ultimately will allow the CHRC to better advocate for improved realization of ESC rights. 

Convening Role: 

It was suggested that other countries’ National Human Rights Institutions (NHRIs) play more of a convening role than the CHRC has played in Canada. These NHRIs tend to bring together civil society and government, and play an important role in moving forward different human rights agendas, including an ESC rights agenda. The independent positioning and general body of knowledge and expertise of NHRIs is taken very seriously by both the international human rights system and national governments. Therefore, with the support of civil society, it was suggested that the CHRC could be playing a very positive role in moving forward the ESC rights agenda in Canada by using its authority to ensure that these issues are brought forward to governments and are able to generate responses. 

Meaningful Engagement:

“If there is to be any credibility in speaking to these issues across Canada, it should be reflective of the people who find themselves most marginalized and disadvantaged when it comes to these rights.” – Expert Participant

Experts suggested that one of the most effective ways for the CHRC to both show its commitment to and give a voice to ESC rights is to actively engage with people who are experiencing socioeconomic deprivation. This type of outreach would help individuals feel more connected to the CHRC and would help to build a level of trust. The CHRC could use its public platform to profile the lived experience of people who are living in poverty or people who are homeless in order to help the public better understand who they are, how it happened and what kinds of barriers they are experiencing. Although it was noted that it might be a challenge for institutions such as the CHRC to determine effective mechanisms to meaningfully engage people experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage, it was also noted that without listening to these individuals it would be impossible to alleviate this disadvantage. 

As stated in the written submissions, it is imperative that those with socioeconomic disadvantage have an opportunity to provide feedback to the CHRC on its plans and programming around social and economic rights, initiatives it could be undertaking, the role it should be playing regarding socioeconomic disadvantage, and how they might be engaged moving forward. This is a human rights based approach to engaging with persons experiencing socioeconomic disadvantage, where people with lived experience are recognized as having authority key role in decision-making. It was stated that this is essential because continuing socioeconomic disadvantage has so often come about because of the exclusion of the perspectives of those experiencing socioeconomic deprivations from democratic processes and from public institutions governing issues of direct relevance to their lives. 

The CHRC could also meaningfully engage with anti-poverty groups – without usurping the important role of these organizations – to discuss the realities of people living in poverty, and why a human rights framework and human rights law is so vital to this discussion. In addition, it was mentioned that as an independent NHRI with human rights expertise, the CHRC is uniquely positioned to engage government in a way that advocacy groups and civil society cannot. For instance, the federal government is currently in the midst of creating a Poverty Reduction Strategy, and while the government may hear from advocacy groups that this Strategy should be embedded with human rights principles and a human rights framework, experts suggested that the message might be heard differently if it were to come from the CHRC. If the CHRC were to develop messages about what this Strategy must do in light of Canada’s human rights commitments – both domestically and internationally – the government may hear this message as a legal obligation that has to be met and may therefore be more likely to heed this advice. 

Federal-Provincial-Territorial Collaboration and Coordination:

It was suggested that the CHRC develop collaborative relationships with various provincial and territorial commissions on particular issues where there are joint FPT obligations at stake. It was also suggested that the CHRC take on a leadership role in this regard, while being respectful of the roles and jurisdictions of the provincial and territorial commissions, to ensure that issues are not falling through jurisdictional cracks. For instance, the CHRC may want to engage with the provincial and territorial commissions to develop a protocol, akin to Jordan’s Principle, to ensure that jurisdictional disputes or uncertainty are not allowed to deprive a rights-holder of access to effective remedies in the realm of ESC rights. Experts were of the view that a collaborative relationship on particular issues between or among commissions is a preferred method of national coordination as opposed to the Canadian Association of Statutory Human Rights Agencies (CASHRA) taking on this national role. Some experts expressed that CASHRA is an ineffective vehicle for national human rights coordination. 

Another idea in terms of FPT coordination, which was also mentioned in the written submissions, was the possibility of developing an “Optional Protocol” related to ESC rights. This would be developed by the CHRC and would be akin to a Social Charter of some sort, which the provincial and territorial commissions would ratify or commit to. This would hopefully move the ESC rights agenda forward in a meaningful way and would lead to some remedial answers for people on the ground that are in desperate need. 

Engaging Media and the Arts: 

“[There is] this tremendous appetite – domestically and internationally – for any energy on these issues, anything interesting and different and alive that talks about economic and social disadvantage and inequality.” – Expert Participant

One way to have collaborative conversations with individuals experiencing socioeconomic marginalization is through different media channels. For instance, one expert stated that currently, there are not a lot of media outlets and sources that speak to African Canadian communities; however, there are some that are seen as credible and it would be beneficial for the CHRC to find ways to engage itself in these spheres. Doing so would open a type of engagement and conversation that will allow the CHRC to be responsive to the ways in which those experiencing socioeconomic marginalization are best reached. There is also room for the CHRC to engage and create a greater presence for itself not only on traditional media outlets but on social media as well. There was an acknowledgment that although those who are most disadvantaged will not necessarily be paying close attention to social media every day, social media does help create an increased social consciousness around these issues and heightens the chances of reaching these individuals in very effective and efficient ways. In addition, other organizations may begin to take notice of the CHRC’s media presence, creating opportunities for collaboration to address overlapping issues. 

The CHRC should also explore ways to engage other federal agencies that are connected to the arts. It was suggested that the professionalization of our rights dialogue on things that are so fundamental – food, housing, education, social welfare – is part of what acts as a stumbling block. When different resources and platforms are used to connect with people emotionally in new and different ways, opportunities for change are created which may not have been evident before. For instance, it was suggested that the CHRC reach out to the National Film Board of Canada to collaborate on the development of creative content that could be posted on the CHRC’s website. These could be used as education and engagement tools, and would help to reach different demographics by broadening the way in which the CHRC engages. It was also suggested that the CHRC use various forms of art, including video and photography, when working with affected communities to capture the experience of living in poverty. This would help to bring a fresh and new perspective to these issues, for which there is a tremendous appetite.  

Facilitating Access to Justice:

Many individuals who are most severely affected by ESC rights violations don’t have access to mechanisms to claim their rights because of deeply embedded barriers to access to justice. However, experts stated that in Canada there is an incredible resistance to subjecting the justice system to an equality analysis. It was suggested that the CHRC would be an appropriate body to do an analysis of the critical issues of inequality that have been identified by international human rights treaty bodies, as well as an analysis of which equality-seeking groups are experiencing barriers to access to justice. It was also stated that access to justice does not need to be solely seen as access to courts or human rights tribunals. Going to the tribunal and making substantive equality arguments is not necessarily the most viable route for claimants. Therefore, if socioeconomic issues are not being heard, if rights holders do not have access to public hearings, and if effective remedies are not being proposed, alternative ways to improve access to justice will need to be created.  

The CHRC has a unique role as a facilitator of access to justice. It was suggested that one of the ways to improve access to justice would be for the CHRC to take forward cases of systemic inequality linked to socioeconomic marginalization and disadvantage. Experts discussed the absence of systemic claims and adjudication in this area. They suggested that the CHRC could play a strategic role by not only responding to these types of claims that come before it, but by also initiating or encouraging systemic complaints on such issues where the CHRC would conduct a scan on which key systemic issues are not being dealt with, who it would work with to bring these issues forward, and how it would frame the complaint.  

There was also much discussion about the need for an inclusive human rights paradigm in which ESC rights are no longer treated as being on the margins of equality rights. In the written submissions, it was suggested that the CHRC could advance, before courts and tribunals and in policy, an inclusive paradigm of equality. This paradigm would ensure that systemic issues of inequality linked to ESC rights are claimed and remedied effectively. Therefore, rather than translating ESC rights claims advanced by marginalized groups into formats designed to cater to the dominant paradigm, the CHRC could demand new ways of thinking about discrimination, equality and effective remedies, so that a legal paradigm that is protecting the rights of some and neglecting the dignity and rights of others is continually challenged to become more inclusive. In this regard, access to justice should be seen not only as eliminating barriers to courts or tribunals, but also as addressing ways in which courts and tribunals interpret law and policy which are exclusive of the experiences of people living in poverty and homelessness. 

An additional way in which the CHRC could facilitate access to justice is in regards to Indigenous peoples. It was suggested in both the written submissions and discussion that because the CHRA applies on reserves, the CHRC should identify issues about on-reserve poverty and social and economic rights violations that it could champion, initiate complaints about, or support Indigenous organizations and civil society to move forward on. Now that it has been established that the underfunding of on-reserve services can be grounds for a human rights complaint against the Government of Canada, the CHRC should be proactively researching what other areas of social and economic disadvantage experienced by First Nations on-reserve can be addressed in this fashion. 

Law reform and looking ahead

“I think that if we are going to change this culture, something bold but reasonable has to be done.” – Expert Participant

Structural and Institutional Reform:

Experts discussed that, when searching for solutions to problems, the tendency to jump to structural and institutional reform or change is common. It was suggested that structural reform is often sought instead of searching for courage and using what is already in place. However, it was also stated that rights will have very little effect unless some kind of infrastructure or procedures to which they can be claimed in a public forum is created; rights holders must be able to claim their rights in order for those rights to be meaningful to them. One expert suggested the idea of having a sub-committee of the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal or another branch that deals specifically with systemic ESC rights issues. This Tribunal would be given specific authority to consider these issues and the normative framework would be that of international human rights law. This would address the lack of domestic accountability for ESC rights in Canada, the lack of access to public hearings, and the lack of effective remedies. 

Another idea that was suggested, which would also involve structural reform, was for the CHRC to create a Deputy Commissioner of socioeconomic inequality and rights. The job of the Deputy Commissioner would be to raise the profile of ESC rights and liaise with government officials to make them better aware of their human rights obligations in relation to ESC rights. The Deputy Commissioner could also travel nationally and meet with individuals and families experiencing socioeconomic deprivation, to ensure their work is grounded in lived experience, while also establishing a lived experience advisory council. This would announce, very loudly and firmly, that the CHRC sees this as an area that requires explicit and specific attention. However, one expert expressed concerns with having a Deputy Commissioner of ESC rights that may be gender, disability, Indigenous and race neutral, which could lead to additional problems. 

Legislative Change:

Experts suggested adding “social condition” as a prohibited ground of discrimination to the CHRA in their written submissions. Although there is still a concern that this ground may be too narrow to accomplish what is needed, experts stated that there is value in including the ground as it may permit the CHRC to have a better legislative foundation for advocacy and for creative litigation. However, while it was agreed that the addition of this ground is long overdue, it was mentioned that this recommendation is not necessarily an energizing solution to the problem, nor is it a bold solution. 

Another recommended legislative change was for the inclusion of specific socioeconomic rights to be enumerated in the CHRA. However, it was emphasized that these amendments must ensure that any socioeconomic rights included in the CHRA can be claimed. It was also suggested that it might be preferable for the claiming mechanism to focus on systemic complaints, rather than individual complaints. 

Short, medium and long-term goals for the CHRC 

Short-Term Goals:

Poverty Reduction Strategy
One short-term goal that was suggested was for the CHRC to begin outreach to organizations that are currently working to influence the federal government’s Poverty Reduction Strategy. The CHRC could convene some of these organizations to talk about the status of the Strategy, how to root the Strategy in human rights, and where the entry points might be at this time for the CHRC to influence the process. However, this would have to happen immediately, given the federal government’s timeline for the Strategy. 

Human Rights Accountability
There are several major opportunities where the CHRC can become active in trying to promote better human rights accountability and access to remedies in the area of ESC rights and federal initiatives. For instance, there are many situations where people are working on issues relating to food security, housing, anti-poverty, disability, and accessibility and are trying to press governments to implement their international human rights obligations, but they don’t necessarily have the expertise in what that normative framework is or how to design legislation to actually incorporate a rights-based framework. Therefore, it was suggested that there would be a real benefit for the CHRC to get directly involved in these initiatives and insist that these are important opportunities for Canada to better implement its obligations under international human rights law in a way that ensures both human rights accountability and access to some form of procedure that is capable of providing a remedy. 

Speak Out

“[The] CHRC needs to get out there, with a courageous, creative, bold statement in public that this is a really important part of its mandate and vision and where it’s going to go.” – Expert Participant

Another short-term goal could be for the Chief Commissioner to either develop a blog or write public letters on issues of socioeconomic inequality that cross into the substantive equality rights of protected groups. The CHRC could also announce that the Chief Commissioner will be identifying critical issues and writing letters to federal ministers as a method of speaking out on these issues. However, to truly speak out on the issue of ESC rights in Canada, it was suggested that the CHRC develop a courageous, creative and bold public statement, making it clear that ESC rights are an important part of its mandate and vision, as well as making clear its unequivocal support for the full realization of social and economic rights in Canada. 

The CHRC could also make a statement saying that it acknowledges and supports the Canadian government in adopting the International Decade for People of African Descent, and encourage Canada to take up the accompanying activities. The International Decade provides a good framework on how to meaningfully address longstanding issues faced by African Canadians, both with respect to civil and political rights, and ESC rights. In addition, it was stated that it would be very valuable for the CHRC to express how it is willing to offer support to make it more than simply a symbolic gesture.  

International Commitments
The CHRC should insist that it has a critical role to play in relation to Canada’s commitments under Gender Equality in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Although this Agenda has been recognized internationally, it hasn’t been brought home domestically. Therefore, the CHRC could play a role in insisting that this be meaningful in Canada’s development programs. The CHRC could take on a number of roles in this regard by asking the government to account for how it plans on meeting the 2030 goal, as well as what goals and timelines have been established. 

Ratification of the Optional Protocol to the Covenant on ESC Rights
The CHRC could consider some kind of campaign to encourage Canada to ratify the Optional Protocol to the Covenant on ESC Rights, which would be supported by civil society. 

Medium-Term Goals: 

Legislative Change
It was stated that some kind of legislative change should be implemented as a medium-term goal, even if the addition of social condition to the CHRA is all that can be bargained for. 

Constructing Cases
It was suggested that the CHRC take on a proactive approach by developing and bringing forward three critical cases on socioeconomic inequality, that are ready for litigation and have not been addressed in the past. 

Inquiry on Costs of Over-Incarceration
The CHRC could conduct an inquiry into the ESC costs of over-incarceration and the effects this has on certain communities, such as African Canadians, Indigenous peoples and people with mental health issues, which is an area that is often underexplored. It was suggested that it would be very effective if the CHRC looked at federal incarceration and the issues that exist there, and invite experts, community members, and people with lived experience to talk about the socioeconomic costs of over-incarceration. 

National Gender Equality Plan
There are recommendations for a National Gender Equality Plan, which the CHRC could play a positive role in. It was stated that it is extraordinarily important that initiatives like this – if they get off the ground at all – get off the ground with a really good framework in place, which is where the CHRC could provide a positive influence. 

Long-Term Goals: 

Legislative Change
Promoting legislative change to ensure that the CHRA covers socioeconomic issues as well as equality issues was suggested as a long-term goal for the CHRC. 

Monitoring Role
The CHRC could take on a monitoring role for issues related to ESC rights by using its resources and capabilities to identify what the issues are and what is being reported on. 

Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls
It was stated that the CHRC is going to have to think about what Canada is going to do in regards to the crisis of the murdered and missing Indigenous women and girls in this country. Experts stated that the systemic part of this issue is unlikely to be addressed through the current inquiry. This means that both non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the CHRC are going to have to think about what powers they both have to ensure that the systemic nature of this crisis does get addressed. 

Conclusion 

The Fast Talk on Economic, Social and Culture Rights in Canada provided a depth of knowledge that will continue to support the work of the CHRC. The different reported ideas from the experts will inform the CHRC as it plans its short, medium and long-term goals for addressing the current state of economic, social and cultural rights in Canada. The experts invited to the Fast Talk provided many valuable insights that the CHRC can use to strengthen its role in approaching this issue in the future. 

Appendix

Biographies of experts

Alex Neve (Co-moderator) – Secretary General, Amnesty International Canada 

Alex Neve believes in a world in which the human rights of all people are protected. He has been a member of Amnesty International since 1985 and has served as Secretary General of Amnesty International Canada’s English Branch since 2000.  In that role he has carried out numerous human rights research missions throughout Africa and Latin America, and closer to home to such locations as Grassy Narrows First Nation in NW Ontario and to Guantánamo Bay. He speaks to audiences across the country about a wide range of human rights issues, appears regularly before parliamentary committees and UN bodies, and is a frequent commentator in the media.  Alex is a lawyer, with an LLB from Dalhousie University and a Master’s Degree in International Human Rights Law from the University of Essex. He has served as a member of the Immigration and Refugee Board, taught at Osgoode Hall Law School and the University of Ottawa, been affiliated with York University's Centre for Refugee Studies, and worked as a refugee lawyer in private practice and in a community legal aid clinic. He is on the Board of Directors of Partnership Africa Canada, the Canadian Centre for International Justice and the Centre for Law and Democracy. Alex has been named an Officer of the Order of Canada and a Trudeau Foundation Mentor. He is a recipient of a Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal. He has received honorary Doctorate of Laws degrees from St. Thomas University, the University of Waterloo and the University of New Brunswick.

Neil Belanger – Executive Director, British Columbia Aboriginal Network on Disability Society

Neil Belanger is the executive director of the British Columbia Aboriginal Network on Disability Society or BCANDS, an award winning, Indigenous disability organization founded in 1991, and the only stand-alone Indigenous organization of its type in Canada. 

In addition to his position at BCANDS, Neil serves in a variety of advisory roles to government and community-based organizations. Some of these currently include: Minister’s RDSP Action Group; Minister's Advisory Forum on Poverty Reduction;, Minister’s Council on Employment and Accessibility; Assistant Deputy Minister’s Supporting Increased Participation (SIP) Committee; Disability without Poverty Network; and former chairperson of Community Living BC’s Indigenous Advisory Committee. 

In April 2017, Neil presented on Indigenous disability issues to the United Nation’s International Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities in Geneva, during Canada’s first 5 year review since signing the Convention (CRPD). In February 2018, BCANDS was approved for Special Consultative Status with the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Development (ECOSOC).

Neil is a member of the Lax Se el (Frog) Clan of the Gitxsan First Nation and has over 30 years of experience working with marginalized populations within both British Columbia and Saskatchewan. 

Shelagh Day – Director, Poverty and Human Rights Centre, and President, Canadian Human Rights Reporter

Shelagh Day is an expert on human rights, with many years of experience working with governments and non-governmental organizations. She was the Director of the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, the first President of the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, and a founder of the Court Challenges Programme of Canada. Since 1984, she has been the Senior Editor and President of the Canadian Human Rights Reporter. Ms. Day is currently a Director of the Poverty and Human Rights Centre, and the Chair of the Human Rights Committee of the Canadian Feminist Alliance for International Action. For many years she has worked internationally, appearing before United Nations treaty bodies and participating in United Nations consultations on instruments and interpretations of international human rights law. She is the co-author of two books and numerous articles on constitutional equality rights and statutory anti-discrimination law. She is a Member of the Order of Canada.

Leilani Farha – UN Special Rapporteur on Adequate Housing, and Executive Director, Canada Without Poverty

Leilani Farha brings a dynamic energy to the role of UN Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing; energy she will need to reach her goal of an international paradigm shift in how housing is understood and approached. In her first three years in the position, Farha has presented reports to the UN on homelessness, the connection between housing and life itself, and the treatment of housing as a commodity and its effect on people who are poor as well as the middle class. Considered a global watch dog, she has traveled to India, Chile, Portugal among other places to investigate whether governments are meeting their human rights obligations with respect to housing. Farha has used her platform and energy to launch a new initiative called The Shift, a global movement to reclaim and realize the right to housing, which calls on governments and the private sector equally to approach housing as a human right, not a commodity.

A lawyer by training, Farha assumed the role of Special Rapporteur in 2014, but she has been tirelessly working to advance the rights of poor and marginalized groups for more than two decades. She is the current Executive Director of the NGO Canada Without Poverty and in this regard she was instrumental in launching a historic constitutional challenge to government inaction in the face of rising homelessness in Canada. She was recently awarded an honorary doctorate by a Canadian university in recognition of her work, as well as the Barbra Schlifer Award for her commitment to advancing women’s rights

Anthony Morgan – Lawyer, Falconers LLP 

Anthony Morgan is a human rights and civil liberties lawyer at Falconers LLP, where his practice focuses on state accountability litigation. He is also an advocate and frequent legal, social and public affairs commentator on issues concerning racism, critical multiculturalism and critical race theory in Canada. He has appeared on or written for CBC, CityNews, CTV, CNN, Toronto Star, Globe & Mail. He specializes in intersectional anti-racist human rights litigation and advocacy that addresses anti-Black racism in policing and the broader criminal justice system. He has advocated on the issue of anti-Black racism in Canada at various levels of court, including the Supreme Court of Canada, and before two United Nations human rights committees in Geneva, Switzerland. In February 2016, Anthony reported to the United Nations Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights on issues affecting African Canadians. In both 2016 and 2017, Anthony was nominated as one of Canada’s Top 25 Most Influential Lawyers by Canadian Lawyer Magazine. You can follow him on Twitter: @anthonynmorgan

Bruce Porter – Director, Social Rights Advocacy Centre, Canada 

Bruce is the Director of the Social Rights Advocacy Centre, a Commissioner of the Ontario Human Rights Commission and the Senior Advisor to the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing. Bruce has spearheaded advocacy initiatives addressing poverty, the right to housing and the rights of undocumented migrants both in Canada and internationally as well as publishing a significant number of articles and book chapters. He has recently co-edited two books: Advancing Social Rights in Canada and The Optional to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights: A Commentary. He has co-ordinated strategic litigation on social rights in Canada and internationally, including many interventions at the Supreme Court of Canada. Bruce was a founding member of ESCR-Net – an international network of NGOs and advocates for economic, social and cultural rights, a member of Steering Committee of the Strategic Litigation Working Group and of the Coalition for the OP-ICESCR.