Okay! Another typical August summer weekend and I’m Scott Savoy welcoming you to our desk.
Today, our president Donna J. Jodhan shares a very serious and concerning piece with her readers.
Please give this one a read and by all means! Share your opinion with us.
Write to Donna at donnajodhan@sterlingcreations.ca
Happy weekend everyone!

+++++++++++++++

The Troublesome Truth About Tokenism
By Donna J. Jodhan

Why Are Persons with Disabilities Really Included in Advisory Groups and Committees?
In recent years, organizations, institutions, and governments have touted their commitment to inclusion, equity, and diversity—buzzwords that often ring hollow in the experiences of those they claim to uplift.

Among the most affected are persons with disabilities, who are increasingly being invited to join advisory groups and committees. On the surface, this looks like progress. But peel back the carefully constructed veneer, and a troubling question emerges: is this inclusion genuine, or merely tokenism dressed in progressive language?

The inconvenient truth is that many of these appointments are performative. Too often, persons with disabilities are brought in not for their insights, lived experience, or expertise, but to check a box—to fulfill legal obligations or funding requirements tied to the appearance of diversity. The presence of a wheelchair at the table or a captioned screen in a meeting does not equate to authentic inclusion, especially when the voices of those individuals are routinely ignored or sidelined.

Committees and advisory boards love to showcase their diversity in press releases and annual reports. Yet when the time comes to make decisions, the very individuals they’ve “included” are often left out of meaningful conversation. Input from members with disabilities is dismissed, undervalued, or treated as anecdotal rather than expert.
Proposals that challenge ableist structures or require significant change are quietly buried under bureaucracy.

This dynamic sends a clear and corrosive message: “You’re welcome here—as long as you don’t ask us to change.”
There is, however, an alternative to this empty performance—one grounded in genuine respect for the lived experiences and adaptive expertise that persons with disabilities bring. Disability is not a deficit; it is a different way of navigating the world, often with hard-earned ingenuity, resilience, and insight.

Including people with disabilities should not be about optics; it should be about tapping into a deep well of problem-solving, innovation, and community wisdom.

So why are more and more persons with disabilities walking away from these groups and committees? The answer is simple: they’re tired of being used. They’re exhausted from shouting into the void, watching their contributions ignored while their presence is paraded around as proof of inclusion. They’re done with being “the disabled representative” and are choosing, instead, to invest their energy in spaces that respect and value their voices.

True inclusion doesn’t happen by filling a seat. It happens when that seat comes with power, influence, and respect. Until organizations start listening as intently as they recruit, until lived experience is valued as expertise, and until disability representation stops being symbolic and starts being structural, the cycle of tokenism will continue.
It’s time we stopped congratulating ourselves for doing the bare minimum—and started asking whether inclusion without impact is inclusion at all.

I’d like to leave you with this for your consideration.
“Outnumbered on the Pedestal”
Scene Description:
In the center, a lone figure of a person from a marginalized group stands on a small pedestal. The pedestal is narrow, slightly cracked, and elevated—but precariously so. The person looks uncomfortable, their posture uncertain, as dozens of spotlights shine directly on them, casting long shadows behind.
Surrounding the pedestal is a large crowd of corporate-looking figures (men and women in suits), all in grayscale or muted tones, standing confidently on level ground. They appear to be clapping or pointing at the figure, smiling approvingly—but their expressions feel performative, almost rehearsed.
In the background, a mural or wall displays slogans like “Diversity Matters” and “One of Us” in big bold letters—but they appear faded, chipped, or partly peeling away.
Scattered on the floor around the pedestal are broken name tags and checkboxes labeled with things like “Inclusion,” “Representation,” and “Visibility.” One checkbox is hastily ticked off with a red marker.
Symbolism & Message:
•
Pedestal = the superficial elevation of a token individual without meaningful inclusion.
•
Spotlights = performative attention rather than genuine support.
•
Crowd = the dominant group applauding themselves for inclusion.
•
Faded slogans = the erosion of authenticity in DEI (Diversity, Equity, Inclusion) efforts.
•
Broken checkboxes = tokenism masquerading as progress.

Image = Under harsh overhead spotlights, a blind woman in sunglasses and a charcoal skirt suit balances on a cracked stone pedestal, holding a long white cane tipped red, while a crowd of near-identical executives in dark suits encircle her clapping and grinning; the stained concrete wall proclaims ‘DIVERSITY MATTERS’ on the left and ‘ONE OF US’ on the right, and shattered floor slabs labeled ‘Inclusion’, ‘Representation’ and a ticked checkbox for ‘Visibility’ lie at her feet, highlighting performative diversity and tokenism.
To learn more about me as an award winning sight loss coach and advocate visit www.donnajodhan.com

Greetings everyone and I’m Christian Robicheau welcoming you to a typical summer weekend.
Today our president Donna J. Jodhan muses in her weekly editorial about the possibility of A possible Canadians with disabilities consumer movement.
What do you think?
Send your feedback to us at donnajodhan@sterlingcreations.ca
Enjoy your weekend!

+++++++++++++++

A possible Canadians with disabilities consumer movement?
By Donna J. Jodhan

Is Canada Ready to Listen, and Act?
In 2016, a bold and necessary conversation began: What would it take to build a
powerful, unified consumer movement for Canadians with disabilities?

Over the next two years, this idea was explored through several virtual town halls, drawing voices from across the country. The vision was clear—Canadians with disabilities wanted to be seen not just as clients or service recipients, but as consumers with purchasing power, expectations, and rights.
The message from many participants was strong: yes, they wanted this movement. Yes, they were tired of being left out of economic conversations. And yes, they were ready to shape how services, products, and policies reflect their lives. But after those discussions ended, the momentum seemed to stall. Nothing substantial has emerged to carry the torch forward. So, what happened?

Perhaps it’s time to ask not only why this movement faded but also what it will take to bring it back—stronger, louder, and more organized. A true consumer movement isn’t just about demanding better services or more accessible products. It’s about leveraging collective power, influencing markets, and holding both government and industry accountable. It’s about reminding Canada that accessibility isn’t charity—it’s business, it’s policy, and it’s a right.

To resurrect this call, there needs to be investment—not only financial, but political and social. Federal, provincial, and municipal governments must treat this issue with the seriousness it deserves. Agencies must stop speaking for disabled people and start listening to them. Private companies must learn that accessibility isn’t optional if they want to reach millions of Canadian consumers.
But government and industry won’t move unless the community does first. So we must ask: Are Canadians with disabilities ready and willing to stand up again?

We believe the answer is yes. The desire hasn’t disappeared—it’s just waiting for the right spark. Today, with the rise of digital organizing, new platforms for advocacy, and a growing awareness of equity and inclusion, the conditions are ripe to reignite this movement. The time has come for a coalition—led by disabled Canadians, fueled by allies, and recognized by policymakers.

Let’s not wait another decade to ask the same question. Let’s answer it now—with action.

I’d like to leave you with this picture for your consideration.
A diverse group of individuals with visible and invisible disabilities are standing together in a symbolic formation, like the shape of a maple leaf — Canada’s national symbol. The individuals include a person in a wheelchair, someone using a white cane, a person with a hearing aid, a neurodivergent person with noise-canceling headphones, and someone with a service dog. Their clothing features subtle symbols of empowerment — slogans like “Access is Power” or “Nothing About Us Without Us.”
They are in front of a modern storefront that has barrier-free access: automatic doors, wide ramps, clear signage in braille and large print, and even digital options for virtual participation shown on a screen nearby. The background includes iconic Canadian imagery — a soft outline of Parliament Hill, a hint of mountains or prairies, or the CN Tower — to ground the scene in national context.
Above them, rays of light or a stylized wave of color flows forward like a banner — representing momentum, unity, and consumer power. The overall tone is one of optimism, dignity, and strength, emphasizing that this movement is not just about inclusion, but about influence, equity, and economic voice.

Image = Two individuals are shaking hands firmly in front of a prominently displayed Canadian flag, symbolizing agreement, partnership, or diplomacy. One person wears a blue dress shirt while the other wears a white one, indicating a professional or formal context. The red and white flag with its bold red maple leaf in the center creates a strong national backdrop, emphasizing a Canadian connection or setting for the handshake.

To learn more about me as an award winning sight loss coach and advocate visit www.donnajodhan.com

Hey everyone and welcome to August.
Ah yes! August! A cup of sunshine and a glass of lemonade!
Today, pleased to share our president’s very insightful editorial with you.
Jump aboard and read on.
Send your feedback to Donna Jodhan at donnajodhan@sterlingcreations.ca
I’m Scott Savoy wishing you a great weekend.

+++++++++++++++

Are we ready to accept artificial intelligence?
Artificial Intelligence (AI) is no longer a distant concept found only in science fiction novels or tech think tanks. It is woven into the fabric of daily life — from the personalized ads on our screens to the virtual assistants in our homes. Yet, the question remains: are we, as a global society, truly ready to accept AI and all the transformations it brings?

The Benefits: Efficiency, Insight, and Innovation
AI’s most celebrated virtue lies in its ability to process data and automate tasks with a speed and accuracy no human can match. From improving healthcare diagnoses to optimizing supply chains, AI has the potential to unlock unprecedented levels of productivity. In education, adaptive learning tools tailor experiences to individual students. In science, AI accelerates drug discovery, predicts natural disasters, and deciphers genetic codes.

On a personal level, AI enhances convenience: smart homes adjust lighting and temperature automatically; recommendation engines serve us relevant entertainment; language models help us write, translate, and communicate across borders.

For businesses and governments, AI means better decision-making. It can sift through massive datasets, spot patterns invisible to the human eye, and offer insights that can guide policies, marketing strategies, and public health responses.

The Drawbacks: Bias, Control, and Displacement
But AI’s rise is not without peril. These systems reflect the biases in their training data, which means they can perpetuate inequality, especially in areas like criminal justice, hiring, and lending. The lack of transparency — often called the “black box” problem — raises concerns about accountability and trust.
Perhaps the most immediate and pressing fear is economic displacement. As AI automates not only manual labor but also cognitive work, millions of jobs across sectors such as transportation, customer service, finance, and journalism are at risk. While new jobs may emerge, there is no guarantee they will replace those lost, nor that workers will be able to transition easily.

There’s also the issue of control. As AI systems grow more powerful and independent, the potential for misuse increases — whether through autonomous weapons, deepfakes, or surveillance tools. Who gets to decide how AI is developed and deployed? What happens when the technology outpaces the law?

The Future: Integration or Disruption?
The future of AI depends heavily on the choices we make today. If approached responsibly, AI could be an extraordinary partner in solving some of humanity’s most complex problems — climate change, disease, poverty. Regulation, transparency, and public engagement are essential in shaping AI’s development toward inclusive and ethical outcomes.
However, if AI is left in the hands of a few powerful corporations or governments without oversight, it risks deepening existing inequalities and eroding democratic norms. Technological literacy and public debate must become part of the AI equation, not just technical excellence.

I would like to leave you with this for your consideration.
Scene Description:
A futuristic doorway stands between two distinct worlds:
•
On the left side, a familiar human world — people working, chatting, using phones and computers, some looking cautiously toward the doorway.
•
On the right side, a sleek, glowing landscape of AI-driven life — robots assisting humans, floating data streams, holographic assistants, and cities run by intelligent systems. Everything is efficient, clean, but a little uncanny.
At the doorway:
•
A human figure stands hesitantly, one foot in the human world, one reaching toward the AI world.
•
Their face shows a mix of curiosity and concern.
•
A humanoid AI stands on the other side, extending a hand — not threatening, but inviting.
•
Hovering above the doorway: a large, semi-transparent question mark shaped from neural network lines and circuit patterns.
Details to include:
•
Subtle reflections of ethical dilemmas in the background: A judge’s gavel, a privacy lock, a glowing brain vs a silicon chip, etc.
•
A digital clock reading “2025” blinking above the scene, symbolizing the present moment.

Image = A digital illustration is split diagonally into warm orange and cool blue tones, where a silhouetted man in casual clothes stands on the orange office side and shakes hands across a glowing doorway with a sleek white-and-grey humanoid robot on the blue tech side; above them the year 2025 and a large circuitry-patterned question mark suggest an uncertain future, while faint icons of gavels, scales, locks, brains, and human or robot profiles float in their respective halves to represent legal, security, and ethical considerations.

To learn more about me as an award winning sight loss coach and advocate visit www.donnajodhan.com

My goodness and I’m Christian Robicheau welcoming you to the final weekend of July!
Where has this summer gone?
Today, I am sharing a personal story from our president Donna J. Jodhan.
We invite you to read and to send along your comments to donnajodhan@sterlingcreations.ca.
Happy end of July weekend.

+++++++++++++++

The Tim Horton tale
By Donna J. Jodhan

Tim Hortons has long been a beloved staple in the world of fast food and casual coffee culture. Their food and drinks are nothing short of remarkable—yummy, delicious, and impressively imaginative. Whether it’s a perfectly brewed cup of coffee, a satisfying breakfast sandwich, or their signature Timbits, the menu consistently delivers both comfort and quality.
However, there’s a crucial ingredient missing from this otherwise winning formula: customer service.

It’s not enough to serve great food if the experience of receiving it is marred by poor human interaction. Customers should be met with warmth, professionalism, and respect—values that should be non-negotiable in any service industry. Unfortunately, some Tim Hortons outlets fall noticeably short in this area.

When customer service agents seem disengaged, fail to make eye contact, or resort to tossing change on the counter instead of placing it politely in a customer’s hand, it sends a message that is the opposite of welcoming. Language barriers may sometimes play a role, but that only underscores the need for proper training in communication and cultural awareness.

Excellent customer service isn’t just a bonus—it’s a business essential. It’s what encourages loyalty, builds trust, and makes the difference between a one-time visit and a lifelong customer.

We sincerely urge Tim Hortons to invest in raising the standard of customer engagement across all outlets. With products this strong, aligning service quality to match could elevate the brand even further in the highly competitive fast food market. The potential is there—and with the right focus, the Tim Horton experience could truly become legendary from the first sip to the final smile.

I’d like to leave you with this for consideration.
Illustration Description:
The scene is set inside a bustling Tim Hortons café, golden light streaming through the wide front windows, illuminating rows of glistening pastries—maple dips, chocolate glazed, old-fashioneds—stacked behind a gleaming glass display. Behind the counter stands a young customer service agent, her uniform crisp, a headset perched lazily on her head. To her right, fresh steam curls from cups of hot coffee; to her left, ice crackles in frosted plastic cups filled with creamy iced cappuccinos and fruit coolers.
A customer stands at the counter, hand politely extended, waiting for her change. But instead of placing the coins in her palm, the employee smirks slightly and lets the coins fall—clink, clatter—onto the tiled floor. The sound cuts through the background hum of conversation and espresso machines. The customer’s eyes widen, her hand still outstretched, disbelief mingling with embarrassment as a hush briefly ripples across the space.
Behind her, a line of customers watches, unsure whether to laugh, speak, or pretend not to notice. Above it all, the aroma of fresh donuts lingers in the air—sweet, warm, and sharply at odds with the coldness of the act.
Note: The customer is blind!

Image = A red Tim Hortons coffee cup with a tan lid sits on a wooden table near a large window, with an urban street scene visible in the background; the cup features the brand’s white cursive logo, and outside, a mix of blurry buildings, a green traffic light, and a few pedestrians and cars are seen in soft daylight, suggesting early morning or late afternoon.

To learn more about me as an award winning sight loss coach and advocate visit www.donnajodhan.com

Hey Everyone and I’m Scott Savoy at the Sterling Creations desk.
Today I am pleased to share our president’s editorial for this week and today Donna J. Jodhan reflects on the topic of uncertainty given our very shaky future.
She wants to hear from you so please send your thoughts to her at donnajodhan@sterlingcreations.ca.
Happy weekend everyone.

+++++++++++++++

Facing Uncertainty: Navigating Our Fears for the Future
By Donna J. Jodhan

In a world increasingly marked by uncertainty, it’s natural to feel a twinge of fear. We live in an era where news cycles bombard us with stories of continuous conflicts, escalating cyberbullying, and societal challenges that seem to only grow more complex.

The weight of these concerns can make us question what the future holds, not just for ourselves, but for our children, seniors, and those with disabilities. So, how afraid should we be, and what can we do about it?

The World’s Uncertainties: A Source of Fear
It’s no surprise that uncertainty can feel overwhelming. The global landscape is fraught with ongoing conflicts, political instability, and economic turbulence. For many, the constant barrage of troubling news can create a sense of impending doom. But should this fear paralyze us, or is there a way to navigate through these uncertainties with hope and resilience?

The Future for Our Children: Preserving Innocence in a Complex World
One of the most poignant fears is for our children. The rapid pace of technological change has introduced new challenges, such as increased cyberbullying, which can have profound effects on young minds. Additionally, the pressures of modern life sometimes seem to encroach upon the space traditionally reserved for childhood play and imagination.

Will our children have a chance to simply be kids? Will their games and toys, symbols of innocence and joy, be overshadowed by the harsh realities of their world? While these concerns are valid, there is hope. Society’s response to these challenges can shape a future where children still have the opportunity to explore, learn, and grow in a supportive environment. Schools, communities, and families are increasingly aware of these issues and are working to create safer, more nurturing spaces for children.

The Role of Toys and Games: More Than Just Play
Toys and games are more than just distractions; they are essential for developmental growth. They foster creativity, problem-solving skills, and emotional resilience. As the world evolves, so too will the nature of play, but the fundamental need for creative expression and joy will remain. Rather than fearing the loss of traditional toys, we might focus on ensuring that new forms of play continue to support the same developmental benefits.

Seniors and Persons with Disabilities: Embracing the Future
Seniors and individuals with disabilities face their own set of uncertainties. Rapid technological advances and shifting societal norms can create feelings of exclusion or fear. However, advancements in technology also offer new possibilities for accessibility and connectivity. For instance, innovations in assistive technologies can enhance the quality of life for many people.
Community support and inclusive policies are crucial. Advocating for and implementing solutions that cater to the needs of all individuals can mitigate some of these fears. Creating environments where everyone feels valued and supported helps to bridge the gap between fear and security.

Finding Hope Amidst Uncertainty
While it’s natural to feel apprehensive about the future, focusing on what we can control offers a way to manage our fears. Here are a few steps to help navigate these uncertain times:
1.
Stay Informed, but Balanced: Keep up with current events, but also make time for positive news and personal well-being. Balance is key to maintaining perspective.
2.
Foster Community Connections: Strengthening relationships with family, friends, and neighbors can create a support network that helps navigate challenges together.
3.
Advocate for Change: Engage in community or policy initiatives that address the issues causing concern. Collective action can lead to meaningful change.
4.
Encourage Resilience: Teach and model resilience for the next generation. Helping children and others develop coping skills can empower them to face challenges with confidence.
5.
Embrace Adaptability: Flexibility in how we approach new developments can reduce fear and open up opportunities for growth.

Conclusion
Fear of the unknown is a common human experience, but it doesn’t have to define our response to the future. By focusing on hope, community, and proactive solutions, we can navigate uncertainty with resilience. The challenges ahead are real, but so are the possibilities for positive change. Embracing both can help us face the future with a balanced perspective, ensuring that we and our loved ones continue to find joy and security amid the complexities of our world.

Just my two cents for today.
Image = The word “HOPE” in a large, wide font with a color gradient showing all of the colors of the rainbow.

To learn more about me as an award winning sight loss coach and advocate visit www.donnajodhan.com

Greetings everyone and I’m Christian Robicheau!
Back from a really enjoyable vacation!
Hope everyone is enjoying their summer!
Today, our president Donna J. Jodhan adds her voice to the DEI dilemma.
She wants to hear from you so please write to her at donnajodhan@sterlingcreations.ca
Enjoy your weekend.

+++++++++++++++

The Reality of Getting Rid of DEI
A Step Backward for Disability, Equity, and inclusion

In recent years, the movement to promote Disability, Equity, and inclusion (DEI) in workplaces, educational institutions, and government policies has been gaining traction. However, a troubling shift is emerging: DEI initiatives are being systematically dismantled across the United States. What does this mean for individuals with disabilities, for corporate responsibility, and for human rights as a whole?
Why Has DEI Been Eliminated?

The elimination of DEI programs has been largely driven by political and ideological shifts. Some argue that DEI efforts create divisions, suggesting that these programs impose quotas or prioritize certain groups over others. Others see DEI as unnecessary bureaucracy, labeling it as an expensive, performative effort. Certain legislative actions have specifically targeted DEI funding in state institutions, often under the guise of promoting “merit-based” systems.
But the reality is far more complex. DEI programs were never about favoritism—they were about leveling the playing field. They sought to ensure that marginalized communities, particularly persons with disabilities, had equal opportunities to thrive. By dismantling these initiatives, we are not moving toward fairness—we are removing the very supports that allowed for an equitable society in the first place.

The Future for Persons with Disabilities
The rollback of DEI efforts spells a bleak future for individuals with disabilities. Many of these initiatives provided accessibility programs, workplace accommodations, and policy frameworks to guarantee fair treatment. Without them, persons with disabilities may face increased discrimination, fewer employment opportunities, and a decline in accessibility in public and private sectors.

Furthermore, the absence of DEI-backed policies means that individuals with disabilities may struggle with accessing quality healthcare, education, and employment protections.

The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) remains intact, but without an active commitment to DEI, enforcement of such protections may weaken.

A Global Ripple Effect?
The dismantling of DEI in the U.S. could have repercussions beyond its borders. Many countries look to the United States as a model for social policy, and if America deprioritizes DEI, other nations may follow suit. This could particularly impact developing countries where disability rights and inclusion efforts are already fragile.
Moreover, multinational corporations headquartered in the U.S. often set the tone for their global counterparts. If DEI is no longer a priority domestically, it is unlikely to be emphasized abroad. This could lead to increased inequality and accessibility gaps worldwide.

The Fate of Equity and inclusion
When DEI is eliminated, equity and inclusion suffer. Equity ensures that systemic barriers are acknowledged and addressed, while inclusion fosters environments where diverse individuals feel valued. Without DEI initiatives, companies and institutions may regress into old patterns where accessibility and diversity are viewed as secondary concerns rather than necessities.

For persons with disabilities, this could mean fewer accommodations in the workplace, less representation in leadership roles, and limited access to critical resources. The erosion of these principles could also normalize discrimination and reduce accountability in both private and public sectors.

Corporate Responsibility in the Absence of DEI
For companies that truly aspire to be good corporate citizens, the removal of DEI frameworks presents a difficult dilemma. Do they continue prioritizing diversity and accessibility on their own, or do they succumb to the shifting political winds?
The reality is that consumers, employees, and investors are increasingly expecting corporations to act responsibly. Many businesses have found that fostering a diverse and inclusive environment isn’t just ethically sound—it’s also good for innovation and profitability. Companies that remain committed to DEI principles may stand out as leaders, even in an environment that is rolling back formalized policies.

A Blow to Human and Disability Rights?
Ultimately, the dismantling of DEI is more than a policy shift—it is a setback for human rights. The rights of persons with disabilities are already fragile, and without DEI, enforcement and accountability weaken. If society turns its back on equity and inclusion, the most vulnerable will bear the brunt of these changes.

History has shown that progress is never linear. The fight for disability rights has been long and arduous, and while this moment marks a setback, it does not mean the struggle is over. Advocacy, legal action, and public pressure will be critical in ensuring that Inclusion and accessibility remain at the forefront of national and global conversations.

Conclusion
The elimination of DEI programs is a step backward, not forward. The consequences will be felt by individuals with disabilities, marginalized communities, and even businesses that strive to maintain ethical and responsible practices. While the future of DEI remains uncertain, one thing is clear: the need for equity and inclusion has not disappeared. If anything, the dismantling of DEI efforts should serve as a call to action for those who believe in a just and accessible society for all.

I’d like to leave this for your consideration.
A conceptual illustration depicting the impact of eliminating Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives. The image shows a diverse office setting fading into a monochrome, less inclusive environment. On one side, employees of different backgrounds, genders, and abilities collaborate, while on the other side, diversity disappears, leaving a homogenous and disengaged workplace. The contrast highlights the consequences of removing DEI programs.

Image = A colorful puzzle-like background features interlocking wooden pieces in bright shades of blue, green, yellow, orange, pink, purple, and red. Some pieces have cut-out silhouettes of diverse human figures, including individuals walking, figures in dresses, and wheelchair users, symbolizing inclusion. The bold black letters ‘D,’ ‘E,’ and ‘I’ are prominently displayed in the center, representing Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. The vibrant composition visually reinforces the theme of unity and representation.

To learn more about me as an award winning sight loss coach and advocate visit www.donnajodhan.com

Hello there and I’m Scott Savoy welcoming you to a simply wonderful July weekend.
Now that the holidays are out of the way, let’s get down to business with another thought provoking editorial from our president Donna J. Jodhan.
Today Donna has some very important questions that need to be answered and she awaits your feedback.
Please write to her at donnajodhan@sterlingcreations.ca
Enjoy your weekend.

+++++++++++++++

Where Is the Minister for Disabilities Issues?
In 2015, Canada made history. For the first time, a federal minister was appointed with a specific mandate to address issues affecting persons with disabilities. That minister, Carla Qualtrough—a legally blind Paralympian and accomplished lawyer—brought lived experience and unwavering commitment to the portfolio. Under her leadership, Canadians witnessed the groundbreaking passage of the Accessible Canada Act in July 2019, legislation aimed at removing barriers and promoting inclusion nationwide. It was more than policy—it was a declaration of value and visibility for millions of Canadians.
Fast forward to today, and we find ourselves asking a troubling question: where is the minister for disabilities in Prime Minister Mark Carney’s new cabinet?
Whether it was a deliberate omission, a strategic oversight, or—most troubling of all—an indication that this portfolio is no longer seen as a priority, the absence speaks volumes. For a government that claims to champion equity and inclusion, abandoning the dedicated representation of people with disabilities at the federal cabinet table is both tone-deaf and unacceptable.
We understand that the Prime Minister has his hands full—between managing a tense global landscape and fending off bizarre geopolitical threats like the latest rhetoric from Donald Trump about annexation. But even in times of crisis, governance must be holistic. A government that forgets its most vulnerable citizens does so at its peril.
Let us be clear: the needs and voices of Canadians with disabilities do not vanish with a change in leadership. The power, potential, and rights of this community demand constant advocacy and attention. The Accessible Canada Act was not the end of the journey—it was the beginning. Without a dedicated minister, the momentum toward an accessible and inclusive Canada is at serious risk of stalling.
Prime Minister Carney must act—and act now. This is not just a matter of optics; it’s a matter of principle and progress. Canadians with disabilities deserve representation at the highest level of government. They deserve a seat at the table—not just as a checkbox, but as active participants in shaping the future of this country.
So we ask again: Where is the minister for disabilities issues?
Rectify this oversight, Mr. Prime Minister. Because equality delayed is equality denied.

I’d like to leave you with this for your consideration.
A grand government conference room is depicted from a wide angle, with a long table where all the key ministers are seated. Each seat is marked with a nameplate indicating roles like “Minister of Health,” “Minister of Education,” “Minister of Finance,” etc. The ministers are engaged in discussion, papers and digital tablets before them.
But one chair stands empty.
The nameplate in front of this vacant chair reads “Minister for Disabilities Issues” — clearly visible, yet gathering dust, with cobwebs stretching from the seat to the table edge, emphasizing neglect and absence.
In the background, a figure in a wheelchair stands at the door, looking in from the shadows. Their face is not angry, but carries an expression of quiet disappointment and resilience. They are holding a folder labeled “Unheard Voices”.
Above the scene, written faintly like a cloud or echo, are the questions:
•
Has this minister been forgotten?
•
Was this seat never filled?
•
Or is it simply not considered important enough?
The overall tone of the illustration should convey both a sense of neglect and a call for accountability, without being hostile — but with firm, visual poignancy.
Image = A black office chair sits prominently at a wooden conference table in a formal room, flanked by a wheelchair on the left and a row of chairs in the background. A large Canadian flag is partially visible on the right side, and through the window behind the scene, blurred towers of Parliament Hill in Ottawa are visible under a cloudy sky, suggesting a governmental or political setting focused on accessibility or disability rights.

To learn more about me as an award winning sight loss coach and advocate visit www.donnajodhan.com