Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
Social Affairs, Science and Technology
Issue 31 - Evidence - April 1, 2015
OTTAWA, Wednesday, April 1, 2015
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology met this day at 4:46 p.m. to study Bill C-247, An Act to provide that the Department of Employment and Social Development is the main point of contact with the Government of Canada in respect of the death of a Canadian citizen or resident.
Senator Kelvin Kenneth Ogilvie (Chair) in the chair.
[Translation]
The Chair: Welcome to the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology.
[English]
I'm Kelvin Ogilvie from Nova Scotia, chair of the committee. I invite my colleagues to introduce themselves.
Senator Eggleton: Art Eggleton from Toronto, deputy chair of the committee.
Senator Merchant: Pana Merchant, Saskatchewan.
[Translation]
Senator Chaput: Good afternoon. I'm Maria Chaput, senator from Manitoba.
[English]
Senator Moore: Wilfred Moore, Nova Scotia.
Senator Enverga: Tobias Enverga, Ontario.
Senator Stewart Olsen: Carolyn Stewart Olsen, New Brunswick.
Senator Seidman: Judith Seidman, Montreal, Quebec.
The Chair: Thank you, colleagues. Let me remind us that we are here today studying Bill C-247, An Act to provide that the Department of Employment and Social Development is the main point of contact with the Government of Canada in respect of the death of a Canadian citizen or resident. The short title is "Main Point of Contact with the Government of Canada in case of Death."
We are very pleased that we have as our first witness, MP Frank Valeriote, sponsor of the bill, from Guelph, Ontario. He has agreed, because of the delay, that he would request 15 minutes and will make a presentation. I will then open up the questioning starting, of course, with the sponsor of the bill in the Senate, Senator Moore.
With that, Mr. Valeriote, please proceed.
Frank Valeriote, Member of Parliament for Guelph, sponsor of the bill: Thank you, chair and honourable senators, for the invitation to appear before you in support of my private member's bill, Bill C-247, an act to make Service Canada the main point of contact with the Government of Canada in case of death.
The process of introducing and shepherding a piece of proposed legislation through both Houses of Parliament has been a singular one. That this may be one of my last accomplishments before I retire from federal politics makes this even more poignant.
Where we can, we must provide relief and facilitate easier interactions with the federal government, especially during difficult times. As parliamentarians and public servants, it is paramount that we find ways to ease the burdens of our constituents and all Canadians. Among the most difficult experiences we might face is the loss of a loved one. Not only is there the pain of loss, mourning and the considerations for making arrangements and burial, but there is the often lengthy and complicated process of making multiple notifications to various authorities.
At present, a bereaved Canadian husband, wife, child or estate representative may have to contact many separate federal government departments and send death notifications to each one because Canada has no single point of contact for the information to be submitted and processed. This can involve the repetition of submitting the same information to different departments and can often be at the very least confusing and tedious and, just as often, painful for a grieving individual.
Bill C-247 will improve a federal government service and reduce the burden on Canadians during a difficult life transition. It calls on the Minister of Employment and Social Development to implement all measures necessary to make Employment and Social Development Canada, more specifically Service Canada, the single point of contact for the Government of Canada programs for all matters relating to the death of a Canadian citizen or resident.
As of right now, Service Canada must be contacted with the notification of date of death when an Old Age Security and Canada Pension Plan beneficiary passes away. They would also have to be contacted for the application of any survivor benefits. If the deceased was receiving employment insurance before their death, the legal representative must also complete a form to cancel those benefits.
Besides Service Canada, a loved one or a legal representative would also have to make an entirely separate effort to contact the Canada Revenue Agency to provide a deceased person's date of death. In addition, the estate is responsible for the completion of final tax returns and making arrangements to stop payments on any GST or HST credits. If the deceased was receiving the Canada Child Tax Credit, the Universal Child Care Benefit or the Working Income Tax Benefit, those benefits must be stopped and, if applicable, survivor benefits can be applied for, but all through separate and distinct departments.
This labyrinth of possible contacts is often frustrating and difficult to navigate in the immediate wake of someone's passing. I was often approached by clients when I practised law to do this work on their behalf, because the confusion was too much. Family members and executors should not have to pay a lawyer to deal with government departments.
The Auditor General of Canada found in a recent report that the integration of service delivery and the sharing of information among departments are limited. Individuals must work with the departments separately, which frequently requires them to provide the same information multiple times. Moreover, the Auditor General found that instructions provided on the Service Canada website about the process for certain life events were incomplete.
Honourable senators may be aware that our G7 partners in the United Kingdom have the Tell Us Once registration process, and France has the online service portal mon.service-public for death notifications, which assist their respective governments to address many of the concerns I've highlighted.
It is estimated that Tell Us Once in the U.K. will save the government more than $300 million over the decade. It is my hope that Bill C-247 could similarly save the Canadian government millions of dollars.
Service Canada was created to be a single service window for Canadians to access government programs and services. Bill C-247 is a practical expansion of Service Canada's mandate and the logical choice for bereavement reporting.
Finally, death is a universal experience that merits a government-wide strategy in order to move toward cost savings and the reduction of red tape, while improving client services and addressing the needs of all Canadians. This bill accomplishes that and supports aims that I know we all share as parliamentarians. I would appreciate your support and look forward to any of your questions.
The Chair: Thank you very much. I want to inform my colleagues that there will be the one-question-per-person rule because of our delayed time, and this session will end no later than 5:03 p.m..
Senator Moore: Thank you, Mr. Valeriote, for being here and for your initiative. I think it's admirable.
I'd like to know what the result was in the House of Commons when you brought this bill forward and what other parties might have felt about it. Was there a degree of cooperation or working across the aisle, so to speak? Could you tell me that, as well?
Mr. Valeriote: First let me say I want to thank Bryon Wilfert, a former MP, who conceived of this idea but never had the opportunity to get it through Parliament. I saw that and when he left I thought, given my experience, it was a worthwhile bill to bring.
I want to thank the Minister of State, Candice Bergen, because I have to tell you that while we may be partisan up here from time to time, I have never had a better experience working collaboratively with a member of the government, a minister, in making sure that this bill got through. It was a tremendous experience for both of us, and I want to thank her for that. I want to thank her department as well.
The bill was supported unanimously. Everywhere I went through Parliament, everybody said this is a no-brainer; this makes sense. It was a pleasure to be able to cross the floor, shake the Prime Minister's hand and thank him for support at second reading, and also Mr. Mulcair. There were only a few Bloc members that may not have supported the bill, but short of that it was unanimous and a collaborative process throughout, including working with the bureaucrats sitting behind me and who worked vigorously to turn what was simple language into something very complicated.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
Senator Eggleton: Congratulations. I'm glad to see that you're achieving this.
I wanted to ask you about the three amendments that were made at committee, though, because originally you talked about a single point of contact for Service Canada and this coming into effect within one year, but they were changed. Service Canada became Department of Employment and Social Development; single point of contact became main point of contact; and the one year provision for coming into force was removed. Can you comment on the implications of those amendments?
Mr. Valeriote: Yes, senator. Those were indeed in the wording of the original bill, and when I met with Minister Candice Bergen and the bureaucrats, we realized three things. Service Canada doesn't really exist statutorily. It exists because it's been created by the ministry beyond statute, and so it would have been inappropriate to refer directly to Service Canada, although the notion of Service Canada is imported by the mere fact that it will be through Service Canada that they will have to deliver the services.
It was not conceivable that what we wanted to accomplish could be accomplished in one year. I am a pragmatist. I realized that, and I wanted to give the bureaucrats and the government time to get moving on this. In lieu of one year, it was suggested — and you'll see it in section 4 — that the Minister of Employment and Social Development must, at the end of every fiscal year, report on the implementation of the measures referred to in section 2 during that fiscal year. That imports the notion that there will be some accountability where they will have to come before Parliament and tell them where they're at, so we can keep pushing them along if they haven't achieved all what the bill intends.
I'm sorry, what was the third item?
Senator Eggleton: The other one was the main point instead of the single point.
Mr. Valeriote: Right. That's because right now not all departments use the Social Insurance Number and, if we say now that it has to be the single point of contact, we know we can't achieve that right now. Once all the other departments, like Aboriginal Affairs, for instance, adopts the use of the SIN, then it will become part of the dynamic we're creating here, this protocol, but until then they have to be the main point. Once everyone adopts the SIN number, they will be the single point.
Senator Enverga: Thank you for coming here. I have one question. When a Canadian who is abroad dies, is it going to be the same procedure?
Mr. Valeriote: A Canadian resident or Canadian citizen?
Senator Enverga: A Canadian citizen that is somewhere else, outside of Canada.
Mr. Valeriote: If it's necessary for them to deal with the government, yes.
If there is time, I have to add anecdotally that when I was practising law, people would come into my office. They would not in some cases know they were appointed an executor of an estate and they would sit in front of me and say, "We don't know what to do. We don't know what departments the deceased might have been engaged with."
It happened to me two weeks ago. A former client named me an executor of his estate. I got called into the law firm and I didn't know what departments the deceased might have been engaged in. Shamefully, I had to say to the clerk for the lawyer, I don't know who to call or what to do. Can you look after this?
I'd like to make it easier for people. It will be more cost-effective for an estate because they won't have to use a lawyer, and it is very compassionate legislation. It is going to create efficiencies in the government and hopefully save tax dollars over time.
The Chair: There is just enough time left — you were efficient — and Senator Seidman will get the last question.
Senator Seidman: Intuitively and in every way, it makes so much sense. Have you encountered any resistance at all? Have you heard anything negative about it? Part of that is this: Is there a way to hook the provinces in, for example, to this, or are they involved at all in this?
Mr. Valeriote: I'm going to leave the thunder of the answer to that question to the bureaucrats, whose hope it is that we will eventually be linked to the provinces and there will be one death notification that will come from the funeral director's establishment to the province and it will immediately flow from there. In answer to your first question, I have heard nothing negative about this at all.
Senator Seidman: Thank you very much. Congratulations.
The Chair: Mr. Valeriote, this is obviously a very clear bill with very clear objectives. You've explained the rationale very well, and we can only hope that clear language does invade the final document in some way.
I'm now pleased to welcome our witnesses who will help clarify various issues around this issue. We will have two presentations and then we will be opening up the floor for questions. We will use the one-question-per-person rule in successive rounds in this part as well.
I understand by agreement that Ms. Janet Gray, Chair of CARP Ottawa, the Canadian Association of Retired Persons, will present first, please.
Janet Gray, Chair, CARP Ottawa, Canadian Association of Retired Persons: Thank you, Mr. Chair and honourable senators. The Canadian Association of Retired Persons, also known as CARP, is a non-partisan, not-for-profit national organization with 300,000 members across the country, in 60 different chapters. We are committed to a new vision of aging for Canada, promoting social change that will bring financial security, equitable access to health care and freedom from discrimination. Our mandate is to promote and protect the interests, rights and quality of life for all Canadians as we all age.
For the past seven years, I've been the chairperson of the Ottawa chapter of CARP. As the daughter of two aging parents and as a professional financial planner, I've personally helped my own family and clients with estate settlement and/or with advice on the process to follow on death notification. As the chair of over 6,000 local CARP members here in Ottawa, I also get asked by members how to simplify their government transactions, especially at a time when their emotions are high and the task is daunting.
I'm here today to support Bill C-247, an act to expand the mandate of Service Canada in respect to the death of a Canadian citizen or Canadian resident.
Currently, Canadians are obligated to take unnecessary measures to notify the government on the death of a loved one. A bereaved Canadian must notify multiple government departments — potentially over 30 different departments in some cases — often requiring multiple forms of documentation regarding proof of death.
Some of the departments and programs include CPP, OAS, GIS, all the lingo, Social Insurance Number, Passport Canada, GST/HST payments, veterans' disability program, death benefit, Elections Canada, citizenship card — the list goes on. That's just to name a few. The consequences of not notifying any of these could potentially lead to requests for repayments or other government penalties years later.
CARP welcomes Bill C-247 in creating a single point of contact for Canadians. This bill will streamline the currently uncoordinated, fragmented system. It will remove unnecessary stress and the burden of repeated notifications to multiple government departments. Instead, the bill will create a clear path for Canadians during a difficult time. Canadians do not accept that the government does not have this ability to share information across their own departments. They only see it as one government.
CARP members would support Bill C-247 as it will remove unnecessary costs for Canadians, as well as cost inefficiencies for government. In a CARP poll prior to the 2013 budget, CARP members said they wanted a budget that promoted a vision of a fiscally responsible, sustainable and caring society. The majority said that eliminating waste and inefficiency is the best way to fund their vision of Canada.
Bill C-247 is a low-hanging fruit that all parties can support as it benefits all Canadians. CARP is asking that this bill be enacted right away.
The Chair: Thank you very much.
I will now turn to Mr. Jim Bishop, who is the Chair of the Government Relations Committee for the Funeral Service Association of Canada.
Jim Bishop, Chair of the Government Relations Committee, Funeral Service Association of Canada: Good afternoon. Thank you for welcoming me. I am the Government Relations Chair for the Funeral Service Association of Canada, or FSAC. I am also the owner and operator of Bishop's Funeral Home, a family-run and independently owned funeral home in Fredericton, New Brunswick.
I'm grateful to be here today to discuss Bill C-247. On behalf of FSAC, I've had the privilege of presenting before the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities before the House of Commons in October. I am very pleased to participate in the next phase of this legislative process.
As funeral professionals, we are often the first point of contact after the loss of a loved one, so we regularly field questions about the steps required by estate representatives to register the death of a Canadian. Every Canadian has unique circumstances, so our answers must vary from person to person.
Currently, registering the death of Canadians is required separately by different departments. For example, some Canadians may need to notify Veterans Affairs Canada, Public Works and Government Services, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Elections Canada, the RCMP, Passport Canada, and the list goes on.
Each stop in the existing process can require different documents and use different processes. This is confusing, costly and inefficient. What's more, the government should work to minimize the burden and stress of bureaucratic red tape while Canadians are dealing with deeply emotional and exhausting circumstances. In 2015, with all the technology available, Canadians deserve better. Bill C-247 could streamline this process, reducing costs, confusion and stress for Canadians.
Ultimately, our goal is simple. We would like to see the government provide a better road map for the death registration process. Proper instructions and a clear outline of the process would eliminate the chance of overpayment of government benefits and the burden placed on survivors in correcting these problems once they have occurred.
I've seen these challenges first-hand. A couple of years ago in my particular firm, we had an elderly gentleman whose mother-in-law had passed away. He was looking after the estate for his wife. He failed to notify Canada Pension of her death. Her account was still open and she was receiving her payments for up to a year after she had passed.
He called me up one day and said, "I have this account with all this money in it," and he couldn't understand why. I asked him if he had notified Service Canada and he had not. I worked with him to help him correct the problem. Service Canada was gracious enough not to charge him any penalties for that oversight, but that's the experience I had with this one individual. He was quite distraught over the fact that he didn't know what would happen with this oversight.
Provincially, there exists the vital linkages system, whereby, under the Constitution, matters of birth and death are written within the purview of the provinces and vital statistics agencies, or VSAs, are the authoritative source for information on births and deaths in Canada. The challenge is that while there are departments at the provincial level that must be identified, there are also many departments at the federal level.
In Chapter 2 of the fall 2013 Auditor General's report, entitled Access to Online Services, Canada's Auditor General examined the federal government's online services offered by federal organizations. With regard to death notifications, the Auditor General highlighted the lack of coordination and stated that an individual must contact:
. . . each department separately and follow different processes, as this information is not generally shared and departments do not offer the ability to do this online.
The Auditor General also found that the instructions provided on the Service Canada website were not complete.
Canadians experiencing the loss of a loved one don't need the added stress of trying to navigate an outdated system with multiple layers. FSAC is committed to providing quality service for clients and this includes simplifying the death notification process.
Service Canada brought to our attention that, while the vital linkages system exists, they are facing a challenge of receiving death data from the provinces in a timely manner. They indicate that the length of time between the date the death takes place and the date on which the registration is finalized with the province ranges anywhere from 7 to 48 days.
FSAC represents more than 85 per cent of all the deaths in Canada. We are more than willing to support Canadians by conveying information about this process to them.
To summarize, we believe this bill is smart, will reduce red tape for Canadians, and will save the government money in the long term.
Thank you for allowing the Funeral Service Association of Canada to be part of this process on this important piece of legislation. I look forward to your questions.
The Chair: Thank you. Even though they didn't make a presentation, I want to welcome and identify from Employment and Social Development Canada, Ms. Anik Dupont, who is Director General, Identity Policy and Program Directorate; and Mr. Robert Frelich, who is the Director, Identity Policy and Program Directorate. Welcome to you both. I understand you're prepared to answer questions, as well.
With that, I will now open it up to my colleagues.
Senator Moore: Thank you all very much for coming.
Mr. Bishop, I'd like to know, the Funeral Service Association of Canada, how many members do you have in your association that you're speaking on behalf of here today?
Mr. Bishop: We represent over 700 funeral homes in the country.
Senator Moore: They are aware of what we're doing here?
Mr. Bishop: Yes, sir, they are.
Senator Moore: And are in support of it?
Mr. Bishop: They're in complete support of it.
Senator Eggleton: Mr. Bishop raised the question of the provinces, so I'm going to ask our officials about this.
I realize you've got to get this all together in terms of the federal level first before you start thinking about the provinces, but most people don't think of government and its various distinctions at a time like this. Government is government.
Can you foresee, as this legislation is implemented at the federal level that, as you get that together, you'd be able to work something out with the provinces that might be helpful to the bereaved people?
Robert Frelich, Director, Identity Policy and Program Directorate, Employment and Social Development Canada: Yes. As Mr. Bishop mentioned, we have a system in place right now called the Vital Event Linkages network, an electronic network with not all the provinces, but nine of ten, and currently not the Territories, which has an electronic system that allows us to electronically transfer data from provincial vital stats organizations to ESDC, to the Social Insurance Register. That is the process which Mr. Bishop was referring to that varies from jurisdiction to jurisdiction in terms of time lag.
With most of the provinces, we already have an ability to have this information. The question, in terms of the federal government, is more about coordinating that information once we get it. The information is already uploaded from vital statistics organizations to the Social Insurance Register and to ESDC, and then we share it with certain of our programs right now. Where we would want to go with that is to share it with other departments.
The answer to your question is there is coordination with the provinces already. We have to finalize that process. We started having these networks in place with the provinces in 2006, and we're working with the last province right now, which is Saskatchewan, to finalize that this fiscal year, hopefully.
Senator Seidman: My question is for the department as well. What are the key challenges that you might face in establishing this main point of contact? For example, do you have to have additional resources in the department to do this?
Mr. Frelich: I would say the biggest challenge we have is we have to make sure that — if you'll notice in the amended bill, it refers to use of the Social Insurance Number and entities, programs and departments that are authorized to use the Social Insurance Number.
Since that is the vehicle with which we receive the information, the Social Insurance Number, because of its importance and its sensitivity as a document and personal information to Canadians, there needs to be specific program authority, i.e., legislative authority from a particular statute, to collect and use the Social Insurance Number. That includes certain departments as well.
For example, if you eventually wanted to be able to disseminate this information to Aboriginal Affairs, currently for the purposes of informing the department when status Indians are deceased, because they confer benefits on them, then that department would need authority to collect that.
It would cost additional resources eventually, because you would need to establish an electronic connection which involves some type of IT connection from our department to other departments, as well, and to finalize the connection with the provinces.
Senator Merchant: My question was the same.
The Chair: That was a very efficient question.
[Translation]
Senator Chaput: The bill has been amended to include the reporting requirement. Who will prepare and provide the information and who will submit the report? Is it Service Canada or the department?
Mr. Frelich: It is the department of Service Canada, so the same entity.
Senator Chaput: There is Service Canada, and then there is the Department of Employment and Social Development.
Mr. Frelich: We don't distinguish between the two. Service Canada is actually the department's customer service.
Senator Chaput: However, the employees are not the same. They each have their own staff.
Mr. Frelich: We are part of the same department.
Senator Chaput: So that will be done by Service Canada.
Mr. Frelich: Exactly.
Senator Chaput: You don't need additional resources to prepare your reports?
Mr. Frelich: No, that will fall under our obligations to report to Parliament every year.
Senator Chaput: Thank you.
[English]
Senator Enverga: Thank you for the presentation. My question is for the government. I was thinking more in terms of identity theft. What kind of precautions do you have to ensure that the one reported is the really the one that was supposed to be acted upon? Are there any precautions that we have in place right now or that will be in place?
Mr. Frelich: Are you referring to how we ensure that the person who is actually deceased is the right person?
Senator Enverga: That's right.
Mr. Frelich: As Mr. Bishop stated, the responsibility for death falls with the provinces. This is why we want to use the Vital Event Linkages system.
The way it works now, once a death is recorded by a funeral home, it is reported to the provincial vital stats agency. What's important about that is they authenticate that and make sure the information is accurate. That way it has a higher rate of accuracy for us.
The Vital Event Linkages network, because it's electronic, it helps to prevent mistakes and is much more accurate than if we led a manual process. Being that the provincial stats organizations are indeed the authoritative source for death, we can be assured that they have the right information from the provinces before we inform anyone in other parts of the federal government.
Senator Enverga: So what is in place in the provinces, if I can follow up?
The Chair: Not really. I'm going to move on and I'll put you on the second round.
Perhaps as chair I could ask for clarification. Do you have many cases where the wrong person is deceased?
Mr. Frelich: As far as I'm aware, since we've had the vital events network in place, it has a very strong record for accuracy and protection of privacy. I'm not aware of any cases where we've determined the wrong person to be deceased.
Senator Raine: I would like to clarify. What happens in the case of somebody who does not go to a funeral home?
Mr. Frelich: Mr. Bishop will probably help me with the stats, but the vast majority of Canadians — in my understanding, well over 95 per cent — pass through a funeral home. In fact, I believe in some provinces it is actually mandated that they must. There are very few situations in which you wouldn't pass through a funeral home.
There would still have to be some type of certificate of death, either through a doctor, coroner or some other process like that. It would eventually be recorded in the vital stats organization, though. As long as it's recorded within the vital stats organization, it would still be uploaded into the Social Insurance Register.
Senator Raine: I'll just clarify from Mr. Bishop: The 5 per cent that don't go through a funeral home, that's what I'm questioning.
The Chair: That is the part of her question that needs to be clarified.
Mr. Bishop: We haven't run into any situations like that ourselves but, as Mr. Frelich had just mentioned, the onus would be on the people that are looking after the affairs of the deceased to provide that information to the vital statistics agency.
The ordinary course of doing things is for a funeral home to obtain that information from a family. We obtain the signatures from the doctor. Once we have the cause of death on that form, it is forwarded to vital statistics provincially. If we were not involved as a funeral provider, the onus would be on the family to provide that information to vital statistics, because that still has to be registered.
Senator Eggleton: I have one question, but it's for the two of you on the right. Does either CARP or the Funeral Service Association provide assistance in going through the system, or do you just tell a person, "Here, call these numbers" or whatever? Do you provide some additional service or information?
CARP, for example, do you do any counselling or anything like that with respect to how to get through these processes?
Ms. Gray: We don't at a national level. We advocate for organizations that will help Canadians do that. I would suggest that a lot of the local chapters do have the advantage of doing that, probably anecdotally and probably community-based. But it's not a mandate that we do that; it's more just again community-based and helping our fellow citizens.
Mr. Bishop: From a funeral service standpoint, the majority of funeral homes in the country will help people with their paperwork. They will provide them with a checklist or a guide of the different agencies and places that they have to contact. So we do give them as many tools as we possibly can to help them ease that transition as an executor. For a lot of people this is their first time doing it, so they have no experience at that. Most funeral homes will be very accommodating in helping them have the tools they need to execute the person's estate.
Anik Dupont, Director General, Identity Policy and Program Directorate, Employment and Social Development Canada: It's a good point. One part of the rollout of this, the implementation, will be the whole communications aspect of this. What we will be developing, actually, is new information that will be made available to the funeral homes. We're going to be updating our website so that all the information and a checklist are provided to everyone, and that it's available also on the website. That's one of the implementation measures out of this.
Senator Enverga: My question is more related to the one with regard to the precautions. What happens if they are outside Canada? Who do they report to? Not the province at this point? I'm not sure.
Mr. Frelich: If a Canadian citizen dies outside the country, there's a separate process that has to go through the Department of Foreign Affairs, as well. I would have to verify, but my understanding is that if the individual dies and they're brought back to the country, once they're in their province of either residence or birth, then they would still have to go through the same process. The only difference would be the process to get them back into the country. There's a separate process that involves the Department of Foreign Affairs.
Senator Seidman: Mr. Frelich, I have a follow-up to the question that you answered for me. You said that your biggest challenge has to do with handling a sensitive piece of information and sharing it with other departments, if I understand correctly, and that sensitive piece of information is the SIN number.
Mr. Frelich: It's also what's in the Social Insurance Register. The SIN is part of that. That's the identifier to ensure you are who you say you are, or ensure we have the right person. The information that the person is deceased is uploaded into the Social Insurance Register, the database, so we would be sharing that personal information that this individual is deceased. That we consider is the sensitive information, and to do that. But to access that information in the Social Insurance Register, your program must be authorized through legislation, or through other regulation, to collect the Social Insurance Number.
Senator Seidman: Could you explain that? I'm sorry. Your program must be authorized. What does that mean?
Mr. Frelich: Exactly. For example, within my own department, the Canada Pension Plan has the authority to collect the Social Insurance Number and upload information into the Social Insurance Register. So, because it is an authorized user of the Social Insurance Number, we can provide information that an individual is deceased for the purposes of obviously ending their benefits and updating our records once they're deceased. If they were not an authorized user of the Social Insurance Number, we could not provide that information out of the Social Insurance Register.
Senator Seidman: And there wouldn't be any way for them to get it?
Mr. Frelich: To get the information, you mean?
Senator Seidman: Yes.
Mr. Frelich: Not through that process. They would have to find an alternative process.
Senator Seidman: I'm getting at the privacy issue here. I'm sorry. I'm probably not supposed to be asking all these questions.
The Chair: You need to get it clarified, because I'm not sure that he has answered the question fully.
Senator Seidman: Exactly.
I think you gave the example of Aboriginal Affairs, for example. If the department doesn't have the required status and authority to get the information, then how do you go about sharing it?
Mr. Frelich: We're not allowed to share it with them.
Senator Seidman: So there's this main point of contact. You're going to have the information. They're going to need the information, but you can't release the information?
Mr. Frelich: In order for them to receive the information, they would have to get new authority to collect the Social Insurance Number.
Senator Seidman: That's helpful. Are some sorts of privacy precautions taken here?
Mr. Frelich: There would be.
Senator Seidman: That's the biggest issue here.
Mr. Frelich: As the department who owns the Social Insurance Number and the Social Insurance Register, any type of change we do of a new disclosure from the Social Insurance Register usually requires both an information-sharing agreement and what we call a privacy impact assessment. It's a whole series of analyses, both legal and privacy, to ensure that if there are any risks from a privacy point of view, they are mitigated and reduced to be as low as possible.
Senator Seidman: And you feel satisfied that that will do it in terms of privacy?
Mr. Frelich: We have no choice. We're required by the Privacy Commissioner to do privacy impact assessments.
The Chair: I think the answer is clear now. You only have the authority to release it to authorized users.
Mr. Frelich: Correct.
The Chair: I think the thing that's underlying this line of questioning is what happens in cases where an individual has to deal with another department of government for which they are required to deal, like, for example, Aboriginal Affairs. Presumably the answer is the executor or the family can go directly to that organization. If they're willing to provide the Social Insurance Number, it proceeds in the normal fashion.
Mr. Frelich: In the case of Aboriginal Affairs, they would have to inform the Indian status registrar that that individual is deceased.
The Chair: The point you made at the outset is they would have to go through another route, and I was trying to take an example where that would be a logical way to go.
Mr. Frelich: Correct.
Senator Raine: Most of my questions have been asked, but just to clarify a little more. Are you telling me, or do I understand, that members of First Nations bands who are on the Indian Register do not have Social Insurance Numbers, or are they just not sharing the databases?
Mr. Frelich: They would have Social Insurance Numbers, absolutely, in most cases. There are always some people who don't have social insurance numbers, but most people do. However, if they're in receipt of government benefits, such as CPP or OAS, they have a Social Insurance Number. The issue wouldn't be whether they have a Social Insurance Number. The issue would be whether the Department of Aboriginal Affairs has the legal authority to collect the Social Insurance Number for a certain purpose. In this case, for death notification it would be to collect and receive the information.
The Chair: That's very fair.
Senator Raine: If an Aboriginal person dies, someone notifies their provincial or territorial vital statistics linkage, but it doesn't necessarily flow through the way it would for a non-Aboriginal.
The Chair: We're going off into the woods here.
Mr. Frelich, you made it clear that you are only authorized as your organization to provide that Social Insurance Number with regard to death to other government agencies who are already authorized to receive it.
Mr. Frelich: Correct.
The Chair: Through Senator Seidman's question, we clarified that, nevertheless, if the individual has to deal with another department of government through their executor or family member, they can provide that information where it's required and that agency can take the appropriate steps.
Senator, are you okay?
Senator Raine: Yes.
The Chair: Okay.
Senator Moore: I think this is related. Now that I have you all here, if a Canadian dies overseas and is buried overseas, how does that statistic get into the system? Is it still up to the deceased's family to notify? Whom do they notify? Do they go to the local funeral director? Who do they report to? How does that happen?
Mr. Frelich: Foreign Affairs would be involved because it's overseas, but I don't have the exact information as to the process if they're buried overseas. I don't know how that would differ. We certainly can check with our colleagues and get back to the committee.
Senator Moore: That statistic would have to get into our information, right?
The Chair: I think the issue we're dealing with here is the required reporting after death. There would only be a need, would there not, for the executor in that case or a family member to report back to a Canadian authority if, in fact, benefits were flowing from Canada to the deceased in the external jurisdiction.
Mr. Frelich: Correct.
The Chair: That would require a reporting under Canadian law because they are under that part of the law and because they're receiving the benefit, right?
Again, I think we're into the weeds. We better stick to those things required to deal with benefits for the reason that this bill is intended, if that's okay.
Senator Enverga: Would there be a fee associated with these services?
Mr. Frelich: No. This would be part of our regular operations. We do this now. It is about improving the operations we do now, because we need to know if individuals are deceased for the purposes of benefit programs. For example, when someone is in receipt of CPP and OAS, we would need to know if indeed they are deceased. We want that authenticated information from the vital statistics organization from the province and then we proceed to ensure that we appropriately make the changes to their benefits.
Senator Enverga: Mr. Bishop, any fee?
Mr. Bishop: We won't be charging any additional fee because the services we provide to the individual families will be simplified through this bill. There's no additional work on our part beyond what we're already providing to families now.
The Chair: I sense that we're good. I think that you have helped to clarify these issues very well. If I can summarize, everybody who has appeared before us seems to indicate that this will be a considerable simplification and facility for Canadians or those dealing with the estates of deceased Canadians. It will make such issues much more focused and direct for the bereaved family in dealing with issues coming at a very difficult time. For any of us who had to deal with any kind of regulation, I think we can applaud the idea that there would actually be a simplification of processes here. I don't think we're quite at one-stop shopping quite yet, but the objective is to bring it closer to that kind of concept.
I want to thank you all very much for helping clarify this, and I think you have made it possible such that when we go to clause by clause, we are able to reach a decision. Thank you very much.
I declare the meeting adjourned.
(The committee adjourned.)