ABILITYscaled (vs) The Royal Bank of Canada

BACKGROUND

ABILITYscaled Inc. (AB) published the "Hey RBC, Your Boss Isn't Playing with a Full Deck" Public Service Announcement (PSA) (see below) more than a year ago. In that time, we have reached out to more than (20) Senior Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) Directors along with John Stackhouse (Office of the CEO), all connecting with me on LinkedIn. All were shown the original LinkedIn PSA and asked to open up a discussion, everyone we reached out to, ignored us.

• Please understand, this is after 2 years of asking RBC politely, and many others in the social finance/investment sector.
• Given the known State of Affairs of the Disabled In Canada, that they be willing to make the effort to work with us toward an operational solution for ABILITYscaled. In short, not once has RBC in all this time, made any effort to look at our work or discuss in any detail.
• REFERENCE; Hey RBC, Your Boss Isn't Playing with a Full Deck PSA cover page and link to the full document.

The Original Post and Outcome...

• I'm confident, the Board (Officers) of RBC, know ABILITYscaled, and this issue. 
• I'm also confident the CEO of the Bank of Montreal and numerous other Credit Union CEOs and Officers were also contacted during this time, with the same pattern and outcome, ignore us and disconnect.
• Our bank account was closed by the Royal Bank of Canada about (2) weeks after the PSA above was originally posted.
• We now operate from my personal bank acct. (not RBC).

In short, despite a monumental effort by ABILITYscaled to provide solutions to some of societies toughest questions, in a responsible and respectful manner, we are ignored.

The 'Bank Act of Canada', and Discrepancies with the

'United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities' (UNCRPD).

In 2018, the Parliament of Canada agreed to the 'Amendment' and ‘Accession' of the UNCRPD, adopting a separate component of this 'Convention' referred to as the 'Optional Protocol' of the of the UNCRPD. However, to this day, the UNCRPD 'Optional Protocol' remains (un-ratified) by the Parliament of Canada. This 'Optional Protocol' includes a key aspect for legislators referred to as 'Article 12', which would allow for an opinion from the UN to be presented as evidence in a Canadian court. (edit for clarity 04/11)

• Many direct references (obligations) within the main body of the text of the UNCRPD, notwithstanding the 'optional protocol' can be made regarding the 'Bank Act of Canada', when considering the 'Intent' of this Convention in International Law.
• By Parliament agreeing to 'Accession' (implies) an acknowledgement of harm, which at this time is undetermined, but (is) substantial enough that the Parliament of Canada was required to ratify this Convention, UNCRPD. By definition, the totality of harm over time requires 'Overt' programs in order to resolve the 'Known' Systemic Discrimination of the Disabled'.

A specific issue discussed in the main body of (both) UNCRPD reference documents'

• The 'Concluding observations on the initial report of Canada' 2017 and, the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities (see links below), is regarding the Bank of Canada Act, and the implementation of the (UNCRPD. Art. 12, sec 28). The UN ‘notes with concern’ a range of substantial issues directly and indirectly related to the Bank of Canada Act.
• REFERENCE 1; Concluding observations on the initial report of Canada' 2017

• REFERENCE 2; the Report of the Special Rapporteur on the rights of persons with disabilities (visit to New Brunswick, Canada 2019)

Understanding the Concept of 'Accession'

Many discrepancies exist regarding the implementation in law and policy, in current Canadian legislation, for both the UNCRPD and UNDRIP.

Accession of the UNCRPD by the Parliament of Canada implies that harm has been done by the State. Further, that (programs) can and should be initiated, regardless of a (total agreement). And so, the use of the word ‘Accession’ in this context of law, is the acknowledgement of harm, obligating the state to provide overt programs and policies, to resolve this acknowledged discrimination.

Jordan's Principle, a pathway for healing.

An example of this ‘overt’ obligation and (action) would be Jordan’s Principle, a legal process used to resolve substantial human rights claims in Canada re; UNDRIP.

• Jordan's Principle is a child-first and needs-based principle used in Canada to ensure that 'Indigenous Nations' children regardless of legal status, have equitable access to all government funded public services.
• It holds that First Nations children should not be denied access to public services while governments fight over who should pay. In order to ensure substantive equality, this can also include services that are not ordinarily available to other children.
• Jordan’s Principle ensures that First Nations children can access all public services when they need them. Services need to be culturally-based and take into full account the historical disadvantage linked to colonization that many First Nations children live with.
• The government of first contact pays for the service and resolves jurisdictional/payment disputes later.

The New Brunswick Training School for Boys (Reformatory)

The Miller Inquiry.

A Public Inquiry of the New Brunswick Training School for Boys, known as The KINGSCLEAR Boys Reformatory.

Documenting the Systemic Discrimination of the Disabled in Canada.

The Miller Inquiry (New Brunswick, 1995) defines a more complex issue within the broader discussion about disability in society. In modern times, we must also acknowledge that 'Cases' such as Kingsclear and the Miller Inquiry, from a human rights perspective, remain unresolved, and may result in substantial claims against the state (Canada), which may extend to (new) civil and criminal investigations of Officers of Government(s).

• For this reason alone, any decision by ABILITYscaled to move this case forward, will require the review and opinion of the United Nations.

REFERENCE; The Miller Inquiry

Knowing the Truth Since 1979. (Gender Rights)

In 1964 a single woman couldn’t open a bank account without a male (guardian) signature. This battle went on for the proceeding 15 years (LEAF Toronto) before (real) change in legislation was made. These changes in legislation propelled a broader discussion about human rights, (multiculturalism) and in the 80s, Gay/Lesbian and Transgender (gender rights) begun to be recognized. 

What happened to Disability Rights?

Disability Rights were a part of this discussion. Then came 'Socialized Medicine' in the 1980-90s) which continued to recognize the 'Medical Model of Disability, where as, at this same time, had begun the implementation of the ‘Social Model of Disability’ within all UN conventions and Declarations, including re-writes of these previous agreements.

• It was decided by the governments of the day to incorporate programs and support services for the Disabled into Provincial policy (quasi-act), rather than enshrine disability rights in Federal legislation, this has been, as the records show, a terrible failure for the Disabled.

REFERENCE; The Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005 (AODA) is a statute enacted in 2005 by the Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Canada. Its purpose is to improve accessibility standards for Ontarians with physical and mental disabilities to all public establishments by 2025.

• In 2019, former lieutenant-governor David Onley (image below) issued a withering indictment of nearly all aspects of the law, AODA.
• The scathing report said disabled residents are barred from full inclusion in the province at nearly every turn, likening some of the barriers they face to long-abolished Jim Crow laws that perpetuated racial discrimination in the United States.

• He said Ontario is nowhere near realizing the goal at the heart of the act, which promises to make the province fully accessible by 2025. He said only urgent, wide-ranging action from the provincial government can put a stop to the continuing cycle of human-rights violations.
• “This is a matter of civil rights, and people with disabilities are being discriminated against on a daily basis in multiple ways,” Onley said.
• “We don’t like to use the word discrimination because it gets tossed around, but what other word describes the situation? It is discrimination.”

Disability Rights, the Invisible Elephant in the Room.

We now have a massive Elephant in the closet called 'Disability in Society' representing unresolved discrimination, harm, and abuse by the Governments of Canada, and staunch refusal to date, to acknowledge the human rights of the Disabled.

Where do we go from here....

ABILITYscaled is designed from the start with (2) possible outcomes

1. To get the doors open and become operational, see our business plan (see website link below).
2. Or use this work, (being blacklisted by government and banking) along with other work, to prove systemic discrimination by the State (Canada), at the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, and International Criminal courts,
3. Attack international agreements and business that exploit these obligations of the Disabled.

And so its been (50) years since we knew the 'Social Model of Disability' was to become the prevailing legal international framework, and Canada chose to ignore Disability Rights.

REFERENCE; ABILITYscaled website link. https://www.abilityscaled.com/

This document is written and prepared by Lance Lattrulo

Chair/CEO ABILITYscaled Inc. Canada