Proceedings of the Special Senate Committee on Aging
Issue 10 - Evidence
OTTAWA, Monday, June 4, 2007
The Special Senate Committee on Aging met this day at 12:34 p.m. to examine and report upon the implications of an aging society in Canada.
Senator Sharon Carstairs (Chairman) in the chair.
[English]
The Chairman: Welcome to the meeting of the Special Senate Committee on Aging. This committee is examining the implications of an aging society in Canada. Our panel includes Senator LeBreton, who, in addition to being Leader of the Government in the Senate, is the Secretary of State for Seniors.
[Translation]
The minister is accompanied by Mr. Jean-Guy Soulière, Chair of the National Seniors Council, and Ms. Susan Scotti, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Income Security and Social Development, Human Resources and Social Development Canada.
[English]
Senator LeBreton will be with us for an hour but her other two guests can remain for an additional 30 minutes. Madam Minister, you have the floor.
Hon. Marjory LeBreton, P.C., Leader of the Government and Secretary of State (Seniors): Thank you colleagues. This is my first experience on this side of the table. Usually I am doing the questioning.
I am pleased to speak to you about my role as Secretary of State for Seniors. Our government is committed to seniors. The role of their recently launched National Seniors Council, of which you will hear more later, is one of the things that we have now embarked upon and I look forward to working with my colleague, Mr. Soulière, as we begin the work of the council.
Honourable colleagues, in five years, the first wave of baby boomers will turn 65. As you know all too well, this demographic shift will have a profound impact on our society and on the economy. For that reason, the Senate committee's mandate is timely and I want to express my gratitude for all your hard work. It will be valuable, not only to us in the Senate, but also to the government and the National Seniors Council and the secretariat.
This committee has already heard from a number of witnesses offering their expertise in a variety of areas, from demographics to geriatrics. I am pleased the committee has framed much of the discussion surrounding seniors in a positive light, and believe the challenges facing Canada's present and future seniors' population must be viewed as challenges to be met, not as problems to be overcome.
Since my appointment as Secretary of State for Seniors, I have had the opportunity of meeting with seniors and senior's groups across the country. I have found that Canadian seniors, by and large, are a relatively content group. They have worked hard, saved responsibly and are optimistic about their future. They are healthier, better educated and more financially secure than previous generations.
The seniors of tomorrow will be different than those of today. Nowadays, age for many seniors is a state of mind. Today's seniors are staying active and vibrant well past the age of 65. It is often said that today's 65 is the new 45. I agree with that and I hope that many of you around the table do as well. If it is a stereotype to think of the little old lady and the bingo hall, it is just as wrong to think all seniors are sunning themselves all winter in Florida. I also do not think that many people at this table who have heard from seniors would agree with these generalizations.
Since taking office in February of 2006, I believe that our government has accomplished a lot for seniors. We fulfilled our campaign commitments and delivered on several significant measures for seniors that will help ease their tax burden, provide incentives to stay in the workforce, strengthen health care and help them remain active within their communities. I also want to take the time today to outline briefly to the committee some of those measures.
To start with, our government has always been perfectly clear: We believe all Canadians, including seniors, pay too much tax. We will always look for ways to ease the tax burden on Canadians and, of course, we include seniors in that group. We increased the maximum benefit of the Guaranteed Income Supplement so it will help an additional 50,000 seniors, and we passed legislation so seniors do not need to reapply year after year to receive their GIS. We also introduced pension income splitting for seniors couples to allow seniors to reduce their tax burden starting in this tax year of 2007.
Budget 2007 also increased the age credit by $1,000, from $4,066 to $5,066. This measure will benefit greatly low- income seniors, a group that needs our help the most. In total, Minister Flaherty's Tax Fairness Plan put $1 billion into the pockets of Canadian seniors and they deserve every penny of it. Budget 2007 also introduced other positive measures to benefit seniors, such as increasing the age limit from 69 to 71 for converting an RRSP. This measure will provide seniors with more opportunities to work and save. Last year our government doubled the pension income credit to $2,000, putting almost $900 million back into the pockets of Canadian seniors, the first such increase in 30 years. This increase in the credit also took 85,000 seniors off the tax rolls.
Seniors also deserve grassroots community programs to encourage them to be active within their communities. Our government's New Horizons for Seniors program does just that. In Budget 2007, we increased the budget of New Horizons for Seniors by $10 million, from $25 million to $35 million. We plan to use some of this money to focus on programs to raise public awareness on elder abuse, and for capital assistance for community buildings and equipment to deliver seniors programs.
The New Horizons for Seniors program is great for seniors and will strengthen communities. I have been to a few New Horizons for Seniors programs and found them a tribute to their communities. Last October, the government introduced a Targeted Initiative for Older Workers, a two-year program that provides up to $70 million to the provinces and territories to help unemployed older workers upgrade their skills and gain experience in new areas.
In January, Minister Solberg and I appointed an expert panel to study the needs of older workers, and we expect to receive the report soon. I am sure the members of this committee will recognize the chair of that panel, our former colleague Senator Erminie Cohen. Most recently I had the great honour of convening the inaugural meeting of the National Seniors Council on May 24 and May 25 in Ottawa. The mandate for the National Seniors Council is to advise Canada's new government on issues of national importance to seniors. The role of the seniors council will be to ensure that Canada's policies, programs and services meet the evolving needs of seniors and challenges Canada faces as a rapidly growing and aging population.
I am excited particularly about the members of our National Seniors Council. The six women and three men appointed to this council were selected through a public recruitment process in which an advertisement was listed both online and in the Canada Gazette. A selection panel was held that made recommendations to our government, and the appointments were announced on the steps of Parliament Hill by Minister Solberg and me, May 3. Our National Seniors Council is chaired by Mr.Soulière, who is here today, a distinguished former public servant with a proven track record among Canadian seniors and seniors groups. The individuals who sit on our seniors council represent a wide and diverse range of issues relevant to seniors. All bring a unique regional perspective to the table.
On May 25, I addressed our National Seniors Council for the first time. I underlined two priority areas where the National Seniors Council had an opportunity to make a real difference in the lives of Canadian seniors: one, help our government provide support to unattached, low-income senior women; and two, find ways to raise awareness and combat elder abuse.
I want to outline what I said to the National Seniors Council last Friday on these two hugely important issues.
Women form the majority of Canadian seniors. They live longer and 60 per cent are more likely to suffer age-related injuries than senior men. Many senior women live alone, often in isolation. The median income for unattached senior women is $19,000 annually, the poorest level of income security amongst seniors. This group needs more than income support. They need social activity outside their home, help with housework and other similar tasks and assistance to stay independent in their homes if they so wish.
They need protection against criminals and scam artists who prey on our more vulnerable seniors and also support to give those who are physically abused or neglected the courage to speak out. This point brings me to the second priority area, elder abuse. We need to understand that elder abuse is not only physical. It is also financial, emotional and even psychological or sexual. Neglect is also another form of abuse, as we find in some of the more isolated communities. It is undeniable that abuse happens. Many seniors do not report elder abuse. Many are scared, isolated and embarrassed to speak out. We hope the National Seniors Council will discover ways to reach out to seniors communities on the existence of elder abuse in all its ugly forms.
We also hope the National Seniors Council can help us present ways to break down the wall of silence to show seniors that elder abuse exists, it is not tolerated and help will be made available in our communities.
In conclusion, let me say a few words about my role as Secretary of State for Seniors, as well as the support structure surrounding the National Seniors Council. It is my responsibility and pleasure to work with ministers in every portfolio to advance the interests of Canadian seniors. I am supported in this work by a secretariat within Human Resources and Social Development Canada that chairs an interdepartmental committee on seniors, and supports the federal- provincial-territorial forum of ministers responsible for seniors. As for the National Seniors Council, it will report formally to the government through the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development and the Minister of Health.
I will lead the National Seniors Council in its day-to-day operations. The work of the council is supported by the Department of Human Resources and Social Development Canada.
At our inaugural meeting, our chair and officials were able to plan for the coming year and prioritize a number of issues for the work ahead. I mentioned two priority areas I want the council to focus on first but I said this to the council members on May 25 and I will say it again today: Our council will be a two-way street. Seniors themselves asked for a national council to advise on issues that matter most to them. To do that the council will seek out those issues by meeting seniors, listening to them, and most of all by reaching out to them. I am certain council members will hear a wide variety of views on these and other issues from seniors. As a government, we will benefit enormously from this input. I expect that a number of other issues will be identified for the council to explore from time to time.
Our seniors deserve nothing less. They have worked hard and sacrificed so the next generation can enjoy a better standard of living. In short, they have helped to build this country and they made it what it is today. These next few months promise to be exciting as we continue to look at how best to meet the challenges and opportunities of Canada's growing seniors population. I am happy to answer questions.
The Chairman: Thank you, Madam Minister. I am sure a number of senators want to put some questions to you. Let me begin.
You mentioned the Guaranteed Income Supplement and the additional legislation, all of which is positive. We have heard, particularly from Aboriginal seniors, that the problem with their applications for the Guaranteed Income Supplement is that materials are rarely available to them in their language. For example, the people who speak, read and write Inuktitut do not speak, read and write English and yet they are among the poorest of the poor seniors in Canada.
Is there any discussion or thought within government to make the information about GIS more available, not only in English and French, but in other languages in this country?
Senator LeBreton: We had a discussion about this difficult situation of accessing government assistance and there is a unique set of circumstances in the Aboriginal community. Their percentage of seniors population is much lower than other parts of the country. However, right now, with the Guaranteed Income Supplement, the bill that we passed allows seniors who file income tax returns to make only one application for the GIS and they will be assisted by Service Canada. We are working closely with Service Canada, which has offices all across the country and mobile units to go into the remote and more isolated communities to work directly with seniors and provide them with a map of how to access services. Senator Carstairs, I can assure you, the problem is one that I and my colleagues wish to address.
With my meetings so far with the secretariat and with Service Canada, I feel positive. Service Canada is a relatively new organization and I am impressed by their ability to get up and running and go out into the more remote communities.
The Chairman: We used to have a national advisory council for seniors; now we have the National Seniors Council. Can you explain briefly how these two organizations differ, and will the National Seniors Council also have the research capacity that the former advisory council had?
Senator LeBreton: Do you mean the National Advisory Council on Aging that worked out of the Department of Health?
The Chairman: Yes.
Senator LeBreton: During the election campaign, in response to a lot of work that was done with seniors groups, we were advised and therefore put in our platform a commitment to have a National Seniors Council that was broader in scope than the National Advisory Council on Aging. I am sure you have the biographies of the people serving on the National Seniors Council. The group is diverse whose members have worked in many areas that affect seniors, whether it is substance abuse, geriatrics or large retirement facilities.
We see the seniors council with a more expanded mandate. One responsibility of the National Seniors Council is to conduct research on various subjects. We are starting off with unattached, single, senior women and the elder abuse issue, but those are only two issues that it was obvious should be put on the table immediately. Many members talked about many other issues, such as health promotion, at our first meeting.
Senator Cordy: Thank you for appearing before us. It has been a while since we sat on the Social Affairs Committee together.
As you know from our meetings with the Social Affairs Committee and conducting our health care study, we discovered many challenges within the First Nations Aboriginal communities. As Senator Carstairs said, witnesses appeared before us who spoke about the challenges they face. As minister, have you had the opportunity to meet with any Aboriginal groups yet?
Senator LeBreton: I have not met directly with the Aboriginal groups. This fall there will be a federal-provincial- territorial meeting and before then, I expect either the council or I will meet directly with many of the Aboriginal groups.
The problem is unique. It is interesting because they have great needs. They live in more remote areas and other issues need to be addressed as well. We understand that this group is a particular community, not only in the area of seniors, but in many areas that the government is working hard to address.
Senator Cordy: Are they represented on the National Seniors Council?
Senator LeBreton: Not at the moment. When we named the members, we named nine of a possible 12. We are still looking potentially for another three members; specifically, we are looking for representation from the Aboriginal community. Several names have been suggested.
When we had our first meeting, we found that not having the other three was probably a good idea in that we could assess where we have need. Nine people met who have great experience in geriatrics, but there might be areas where there is a need. By having three positions still, we will look at the applicants we have and we hope to fill the positions soon.
Senator Cordy: On thing we heard, which would not be a surprise to you, was the lack of housing for Aboriginal groups overall, but specifically related to senior Aboriginal groups. One statistic was that only 0.5 per cent of the First Nations have access to long-term care facilities. Often, they must leave their home in the community and when they do, they leave behind their culture.
Many Aboriginals are moving into urban areas and we also heard about their challenges in finding housing that is suitable for them. Will you look at this area, and what do you see happening there? Only 0.5 per cent of First Nations seniors being able to find long-term housing would be close to a crisis situation, although I am not sure I want to use that term.
Senator LeBreton: Housing is not only a concern in the Aboriginal community. It is one I have heard many times since I was named Secretary of State for Seniors. We discussed it at the National Seniors Council and with my colleagues at the seniors' secretariat. Housing is a difficult area to put under one roof. It crosses over into provincial, territorial and even municipal areas. It is an area we will put on the table to discuss when we meet our provincial and territorial counterparts, but there is no easy answer to the issue of housing.
When I watched the deliberations of this committee at one point, Senator Murray indicated we should pick certain areas where we can focus on immediate need. Housing is a huge issue that involves many levels of government. We have only started with this new council, so we picked the two areas that were most obvious and that most groups told us were the most important to deal with immediately: senior, single older women and the abuse issue. That is not to say that we will not seek solutions when we are working with our provincial and territorial partners on the issue of housing.
In terms of Aboriginal housing, the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, Minister Prentice, has been making strides in that area as well. However, the problem is a big and, unfortunately, has no easy solution.
Senator Cordy: You spoke about federal-provincial-territorial collaboration, and housing is one area that would fall under that area. Many issues related to seniors cross jurisdictions. Do you plan formal meetings between the provinces and territories related specifically to seniors or are there informal meetings? How will you do it? So many areas cross over the various jurisdictions, as you mentioned.
Senator LeBreton: Very much so: You would know that since 1992, there have been regular meetings of the federal- provincial-territorial forum of ministers responsible for seniors. We met in Prince Edward Island last fall and we will meet in Saskatchewan this November. Also, we expect and encourage the members of the National Seniors Council, in their role as members of the council, to meet their counterparts in the provinces at the various levels of government and also at major provincial seniors organizations. We are counting on the members of the National Seniors Council to come back to us with the results of their meetings. They are not restricted in any way in the people they can meet. The more people who advance these issues, the better it is, as far as I am concerned. As their first order of business, we encourage them, when they go back to their regions, to meet their regional counterparts, including government officials, whether provincial, territorial or municipal.
Senator Cordy: One question I planned to ask is on single senior women. You said that you will conduct substantial research in that area. The levels of poverty have dropped dramatically in Canada, which is positive, but when we look at the numbers more closely, we discover that those most at risk of living in poverty are single senior women. Recent legislation in respect of the Canada Pension Plan and the Guaranteed Income Supplement is a positive step. A government report that came out about one month ago stated that the Canada Pension Plan is designed for those who will stay in the workforce for most of their adult lives. We know that women are likely to be the ones who stay at home with young children, so they have a gap in their contributions to CPP. Earlier, you made reference to the fact that caregivers tend to be women. If they are full-time caregivers, they would often be part-time workers outside the home or would leave the work force. As a result, when it comes time to receive CPP, their pension amounts are less, if they qualify to receive any at all.
Will you look into that issue? Is there a way that we can change how contributions are made to the Canada Pension Plan so that women are not affected so negatively by the plan as it exists now due to those gaps in contributions?
Senator LeBreton: Yes, this is interesting. You are right in saying that many senior women have worked in the home and not in the paid workforce outside the home. I have used the example of the difference between myself as a senior and my mother as a senior. She worked hard all her life but not in the paid workforce, so she was a completely different senior than I will be because I have worked in the paid workforce. Yes, women tend to leave the paid workforce to stay home and look after their families. Another dynamic is happening today — people leaving the paid workforce to look after their aging parents. They are the so-called ``sandwich generation,'' because they — women and men — leave the paid workforce to look after their teenagers at home as well as their aging parents.
We had a great deal of discussion about this issue at the National Seniors Council. We want to develop substantive recommendations for ways in which to address the issue of such caregivers so they can opt out and then back in to the Canada Pension Plan. It is true that the number of seniors living below the poverty line has decreased dramatically but there is still the specific group of senior single women.
Interestingly enough, at the first meeting of the National Seniors Council, it was pointed out by a female member of the council that many men fall into this category as well. As demographics change, we find that in many cases women are the bread winners while the men stay at home to look after the family. We might see the same problem with some men, whereby they depend on their wives for their income. Many of them are in that situation.
We addressed this area specifically at the first meeting of the National Seniors Council and that is why we put senior single women as our priority, along with elder abuse, as the first issues to be tackled.
Senator Keon: Senator LeBreton, the question of research arose from the chair. I want to explore this research issue. Obviously, the NSC will need to address it. A tremendous amount of new and supplemental knowledge is needed to deal with these problems intelligently. It would concern me if new avenues for doing this research spring up. For example, in my experience over the years, research by Health Canada, as opposed to government labs such as the National Research Council, which has always done good work, was often sub-standard, although I do not think that was the fault of Health Canada. It was sub-standard simply because their net was not broad enough.
We have built a tremendous research platform due to successive governments in Canada, as it relates to health, such as the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, CIHR. Between the various institutes, they have all the necessary machinery, coupled with Statistics Canada, to tackle almost any problem, although it might require two or three of their institutes.
It would be important for the National Seniors Council, when addressing the holes in knowledge and the supplemental knowledge they need to gain, to sit down with, at least, the leaders at CIHR and the relevant institutes to say to them: ``We do not possess sufficient knowledge to deal with these areas intelligently. What can you do for us so that we do not need to rely on new institutional studies through other avenues?''
Senator LeBreton: As I said in my remarks, I will work closely with two ministers — the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development and the Minister of Health, both of whom have a huge role to play. Going back to the question from Senator Carstairs, some of the work that was done in the Department of Health by the National Advisory Council on Aging, and other research, will be made available. We will encompass much of the work done, on the whole, in the area of health promotion. Certain demands on the health care system are specific to senior women that are unlike the demands of other groups. For example, senior women have a much higher incidence of injuries due to falls. In terms of research, the National Seniors Council, in conjunction with the help of the seniors' secretariat, will work to provide us with research data so we do not need to repeat research that has been completed. Perhaps, Ms. Scotti would like to add a comment. We will have access to information from the former National Advisory Council on Aging and from the minister. I see myself as the facilitator between the Minister of health and the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development in dealing with the National Seniors Council.
Susan Scotti, Senior Assistant Deputy Minister, Income Security and Social Development, Human Resources and Social Development Canada: We have a good relationship with the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and have tapped into the good work they have done. The intent is not to reinvent the wheel in any way. It is to build on the relationships that exist with the number of research bodies, identify gaps and maybe identify specific areas where some applied research needs to be done rather than academic and framework kind of research. The council is new and must establish its own priorities in the area of research, and that is yet to come.
Senator Keon: My concern is that when you establish those priorities, you will have nine outstanding people on that council. You must be careful to look at the research platform that exists in Canada and not try to build a little platform because there is a big one there.
I have raised this other issue with our chair and although we have not had time to explore it, I think we agree. There is tremendous enthusiasm now for extending the horizons of seniors, which is wonderful. However, a public safety issue has not been addressed at all. In my own career, for example, there used to be mandatory retirement for surgeons. That is gone. As far as I can tell, they can operate now till they are 95. If I ever had to undergo surgery — God forbid, because I always said I would much rather do it than have it — the first thing I would do is ask the surgeon how old he is.
Senator Murray: Or she.
Senator Keon: Or she: yes, I am sorry. I do not know what I would do without Senator Murray. He keeps me straight.
I think this issue is tremendous. For example, the Air Canada pilots voted overwhelmingly, and I do not know the number or how strong the vote was, but they voted strongly to maintain their mandatory retirement at age 60. However, an Air Canada pilot, at age 60, can walk down the corridor of the airport and fly for Jazz until that pilot is 108, I guess — I do not know how old. I should not have said that. I take that back. Sorry, that remark is completely unfounded and glib. I do not know what the age limit is, but I know they can fly for Jazz after they leave Air Canada.
I think that your council must address this issue without in any way dampening the enthusiasm for all the good things that are happening. They are great and all that is wonderful, but a public safety issue needs to be addressed. How do you feel about that?
Senator LeBreton: We discussed this issue at our National Seniors Council. Back in 1986, when mandatory retirement for public servants was abolished with the exception of the Canadian Forces and RCMP, it sent a great signal to people, especially those who were aging and were facing leaving the workforce. I heard from many seniors groups that this matter is one of choice for them. Some look forward to becoming of pensionable age, some before they are even 65, and others want to continue working. With our labour shortages now, one thing we were looking at in the older workers panel is to retrain people who may have been laid off in one particular area, but are required somewhere else.
At the end of the day, public safety and security must prevail and I think, in certain professions, the issue of mandatory retirement is still, and should be, determined on the criteria of public safety and security. I think most Canadians, whether they are seniors or not, would agree with that for the reasons you have stated. However, it is an issue, because there are people, goodness knows we see them every day on television, who are viable and contribute much to society. They feel that they are capable of doing all kinds of things and most are, but in certain professions we must be governed by public safety and security.
Senator Chaput: I apologize for being late. I hope my apologies will be accepted.
Madam Minister, in regard to reaching out to seniors, I want to address abuse of seniors. As we all know, abuse goes on and often is not reported for a number of reasons. One reason is, if someone else does not report the abuse for them, they will not report it because they are not sure how to.
I am sure the council will have discussions as to how they will address the issue of abuse, but how do you ensure you reach as many seniors as possible with information? Have you had a first discussion on the means to reach them?
Senator LeBreton: We will put this area at the top of the agenda and that is why, when we increase the funding for the New Horizons for Seniors program by $10 million, we will use some of that money for infrastructure. Many seniors organizations have their own facilities and they need upgrading so we will use some of the money for that, but I have asked for $2 million of that extra $10 million to be set aside specifically to deal with the issue of elder abuse.
Abuse can take many forms, including identity theft. Abuse often takes place within families where seniors are abused by their own children or their spouse. There is a lot of silence in that they do not want to cause problems for their families, but again, it is a stigma, like we found in the mental health study. Many people think if they talk about it, they show that something is wrong with their family.
We plan to look at ways to step up the ability of seniors to report abuses and also to make them aware of what they can do and what kind of support groups are within their communities. That is one reason the New Horizons for Seniors program is so important. It brings people out into the community. We will conduct research and consultation, but the provinces have already done a lot on this issue. We will use, I hope, $2 million of that extra $10 million and it will be for awareness and education: what to do and how to recognize it.
Some people have become so used to living in these conditions that they do not even recognize that something can be done to help them.
When we had our meetings last week, that area was in addition to the single senior women and an area where — Mr. Soulière can elaborate on it as he has had further conversations with the council — members went back to their various regions with a clear knowledge that we want to focus on. What is happening is reprehensible. When I was first made Secretary of State for Seniors, people came up to me in the grocery store or drugstore. Many of them were women and most wanted to stay in their own homes or apartments. They wanted to know they could walk on streets and not be attacked. They wanted to know when they used their bank card it would not be stolen from them. They have personal security issues but they also fear being financially abused by a family member who says they are acting in their best interests. These people know this is not right. It is an education program and it provides help on these issues.
Senator Chaput: Is it presently only for independent seniors in their homes or apartments, or will it expand to residences and nursing homes?
Senator LeBreton: Yes, definitely it will be extended. Residences and nursing homes are where much abuse takes place. The focus is not restricted. It is the whole issue of elder abuse. We see examples of it every day in the newspapers and we hear about it. First, we will work with the provinces where work has been done to understand the magnitude of the problem because it is significantly under reported. Second, we will conduct research and come up with positive recommendations to implement and provide help for people who are abused.
The Chairman: One issue that has been brought to my attention recently in emails from seniors, is their concern about the publication of their birthdate on the electoral lists, therefore making them subject to scam artists because they are identified as seniors. Will your group examine that specific issue with respect to the birthdates given out?
Senator LeBreton: This matter is before the Senate in Bill C-31. When the government tabled the bill initially, they did not put the birthdates on the electoral lists. The bill was amended in the House of Commons to include the birthdates on the electoral list. I understand the Senate has amended it again and taken the birthdate off. That is a good question. Peoples' ages on the electoral list that is given to political parties can cause a problem. The senate amendment removes birthdates. We will see if that amendment stands because it would remove the problem. The problem has come up specifically when we talked to seniors, but I am sure if birthdates ended up on the electoral list, they would be of great concern.
Senator Murray: I do not have a question, although I have a brief speech. Senator LeBreton can leave it with her officials or she can comment. I have a bias on these issues, including the social policy generally. My view is well known to colleagues here that the role of the federal government is first, income support, and second, research. I interject here as Senator Keon seemed to make a lot of sense on the research issue. The third role of the federal government is education in the broadest sense, creating awareness of these problems. Fourth is the power of our example with regard to people who are within our own jurisdiction: Aboriginals, members of our federal workforce, Canadian Forces and the civil service.
While he did not say so in as many words, this represents the approach to federal-provincial relations Mr. Harper has taken. I agree with that approach. However, a program such as New Horizons for Seniors is an anomaly. I knew something about that program many years ago: what it was and why it was. It was cancelled by the Chrétien government. It was revived either by the Martin government or your government.
The Chairman: It was revived by the Martin government.
Senator Murray: Yes, it was revived not because it was filling a need that no one else would or could fill, but because elected members of Parliament wanted it for reasons we both understand. I will not complain about that as it is not an enormous expenditure of money. It can be said to do some good. I am not sure what the criteria are. You suggested it is now engaged in some matters that could be useful, but the program is an anomaly. It is not the use of direct spending power that I, for one, and your party generally, would normally approve. I am concerned when you talk about reaching out to seniors' communities on this matter of family violence. The people who know about these issues are the people on the ground. Institutionally, we are not on the ground — we being the federal apparatus. We cannot be nor should we be. If you reach out to seniors communities to tackle something such as violence against seniors, the Criminal Code, of course, is within our jurisdiction. The provinces, local governments, voluntary organizations and churches reach out. As an institution, we do not know beans about family violence or violence against seniors. We know statistics. In the small town where I grew up, I could put names on the families where violence occurred and we could identify the factors at work. Alcohol was often a factor and various forms of emotional stress and so forth. No one in far-off Ottawa could do anything directly about that. The people who could do something for the people are those most directly related to those people.
I do not want us to overreach. I want to show proper deference to people who do know what it is about, and I want to help and encourage them. We can make a real effort in the areas I have suggested such as income support, research, education and the power of our own example to the people who are directly in our jurisdiction. Thus endeth my speech.
Senator LeBreton: Thank you, Senator Murray. You and I go a long way back.
Senator Murray: We were juniors together and now we are seniors together.
Senator LeBreton: I have listened to several excellent speeches by Senator Murray. Senator Murray has listened to a few of mine too. As I emphasized in my opening remarks, our role, and the role of the National Seniors Council, is to deal with issues of national concern including income support, research, education and awareness. I suppose we are expanding education and awareness a little bit. I think that area is where the whole elder abuse issue falls.
In terms of the New Horizons for Seniors program, you are correct that it is not a lot of money. The initiative comes not so much from MPs, specifically, as from the seniors themselves. People within the department work with seniors' groups when the groups apply for New Horizons funds.
I have been to some of the facilities. To me, the issue is almost a health one, in many ways. Seniors have these facilities, which contribute to their social health and well-being. They are in the community, meeting other people.
Senator Murray: It is great, but I say the role of the federal government is not to finance square dancing troupes in Cape Breton or the Ottawa Valley.
Senator LeBreton: The program is not necessarily square dancing. I was in a facility that had New Horizons money that was helping educate families as to how to help with Alzheimer's — how to set up their homes to help anybody suffering from Alzheimer's or any form of dementia recognize certain things in their home. There are a lot of good programs.
I agree, however. That is why, in answering the question on housing, we do not want to fall all over each other in provincial and territorial jurisdictions. However, on the issue of elder abuse, and using New Horizons for Seniors money to fund and research this program, I think it will go a long way to helping seniors. Abuse is not only an issue for seniors; it is an issue for everyone. As you pointed out, we were all raised in small communities — the issue is to have other people recognize elder abuse.
Before I close, one area of interest in seniors is the issue of mental health. It is interesting because of the mental health study conducted by the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology. This area will be of particular interest to one of our former colleagues, Senator Kirby. We heard all over the country that mental health is also an issue with seniors.
Having said that, we are starting off in income support, research, education and awareness — those are our main areas of responsibility. In closing, I want to say how delighted I am that we have an expert who has worked on seniors issues for many years, Jean-Guy Mr. Soulière, who will stay, and also Susan Scotti and the support group at the seniors' secretariat.
The Chairman: Madam Minister, you will not be surprised that I will end on an issue of paramount importance to me, and that is that the fact that 220,000 people die every year and 75 per cent of them are seniors. We deliver palliative care probably to 15 to 20 per cent of them.
Unfortunately, your government has cut the secretariat and put an end to the Canadian Strategy on Palliative and End-of-Life Care, which focused on research, education and awareness. What will be the role of your council and your ministry with respect to palliative and end of life care?
Senator LeBreton: Thank you, Senator Carstairs. I would have expected you to end on that issue. I have listened to you in the Senate and you have done great work on the issue of palliative care.
As I said in my remarks, the Minister of Health — one of the ministers for whom I facilitate on all matters of health related to seniors, including palliative care — is aware of your great concern. I do not have the answers specifically on the funding. I think I managed to provide a little bit of information in the Senate, but I know it is a great concern and it is something, Senator Carstairs, that you deserve great credit for continuing because it is a serious problem.
Again, we are into an area, as with housing, where there are provincial and territorial responsibilities as well. However, I would be happy, when we have our meeting with the provinces and territories, to advise them of your great concern and obtain an update as to what, if anything, they plan to do to improve the situation.
The Chairman: I want to thank the minister, Mr. Soulière and Ms. Scotti for joining with us this afternoon. It has added to our overall study and we hope you will look forward to our conclusions.
Senator LeBreton: As you said at the beginning, if there are any further questions —
The Chairman: I do not think there are any further questions for the others, but thank you for joining us.
The committee continued in camera.
The committee resumed in public.
The Chairman: Honorable senators, welcome to the meeting of the Special Senate Committee on Aging. As you know, our first panel today was Marjory LeBreton and our second panel is Mr. Jean-Guy Saint-Gelais.
[Translation]
We have with us today Mr. Jean-Guy Saint-Gelais, Secretary and Former President of the Conférence des Tables régionales de concertation des aînés du Québec (Association of Quebec Regional Seniors Consultation Groups).
The mission of Regional Seniors Consultation Groups is to provide seniors with a regional forum for dialogue and consultation, as well as the opportunity to speak as one voice, thus articulating more clearly their needs and sharing common concerns.
[English]
We also have a video conference from Grande Prairie but we are having technical difficulty. We do not want to delay Mr. Saint-Gelais further so we will ask him to make his presentation and if we hook into the video conference, so be it.
[Translation]
Jean-Guy Saint-Gelais, Secretary and Former President, Conférence des Tables régionales de concertation des aînés du Québec: Madam Chairman, allow me to begin by thanking you for giving us this opportunity to appear before this special committee. It gives us a unique opportunity to explain our perspective on the situation of seniors in Quebec and Canada.
My name is Jean-Guy Saint-Gelais and I come from Sherbrooke, Quebec. I am both a senior and a retiree, and I am actively involved in my community. I am the Secretary of the association of Quebec Regional Seniors Consultation Groups and I also held the office of President of the association for three years. I am also the National Vice-President of CNPEA, the Canadian Network to Prevent Elder Abuse — a subject that was discussed extensively in your previous session — and I sit on a host of boards of directors of seniors and retirees organizations.
The Quebec system is unique and is the envy of many provinces and indeed many countries. Allow me to share a little anecdote with you by way of example: when the International Francophone Conference on Geriatrics and Gerontology was held in Quebec City in October 2006, 13 representatives from 11 francophone countries asked me to explain the system that we implemented in 1999. A number of countries are evaluating the possibility of adopting our organizational model. Allow me to explain it to you.
Each of Quebec's 17 administrative regions has a Regional Seniors and Retirees Consultation Group. The group comprises representatives from regional seniors associations, groups and organizations, as well as individual members. Those who provide services to seniors are also represented in the regional groups.
Each group is independent and has its own board of directors. The Quebec Department of Families and Seniors provides an annual grant for operational costs. The mission of the Regional Seniors Consultation Groups is to provide seniors with a regional forum for dialogue and consultation, as well as providing them with the opportunity to speak as one voice, thus articulating more clearly their needs. They also help seniors define the challenges they face and encourage them to participate fully in civic life.
The association of the Quebec Regional Seniors Consultation Groups is an umbrella organization comprising 17 regional groups. The mission of the association is to be a champion for provincial and national issues concerning Quebec seniors and to represent the regional groups at the various levels of government. Our association also works to support the mission of the Seniors Council.
Our association has tabled opinions, briefs and resolutions with various levels of government. Recently, we submitted a resolution to the federal government calling for a department for seniors to be set up. I will come back to this subject a little later.
In short, the association of Quebec Regional Seniors Consultation Groups ensures that the voices of 2.5 million Quebec seniors, aged 50 and over, are heard by the federal and provincial governments. Our organizational model has been fully up and running for the past four years and I am very proud to present it to you here today.
I have also tabled a document entitled 2007 — Le monde des aînés et des retraités du Québec, which provides an overview of the situation and explains the relationship between the different stakeholders involved with seniors. It provides a snapshot of the unique structure that we have implemented in Quebec. I am tempted to say that, as usual, Quebec has shown itself to be a distinct society.
What is meant by the term ``senior''? I do not pretend to have a perfect definition of the term. Indeed, a number of sociologists, researchers, specialists, academics and politicians have attempted to define it. What I can say, however, is that it is important not to use ``retiree'' and ``senior'' as synonyms, as they are not necessarily the same.
A retiree is somebody who has stopped working in a given job and who receives a pension from his or her previous employer. A person can take several retirements in the course of his or her working life; retirement is, therefore, a state of being, rather than a question of age. The definition is both simple and unequivocal, and I will say no more on the matter.
The definition of a senior is more complicated. There is a marked tendency to associate seniors with old age. In everyday vocabulary, people use ``senior'' and ``elderly'' interchangeably. As some people of a certain age do not like admitting that they are getting long in the tooth, it is preferable to use the term ``seniors,'' as is done in Quebec. On October 1, we celebrate International Seniors Day, as opposed to the international day of older persons, as decreed by the United Nations. We are careful to avoid touching a raw nerve, especially amongst women.
In my opinion, a senior is somebody who has reached a level of maturity and experience that allows him or her to pass on values and knowledge to the next generation. You might say that this is what parents do with their children, and you would be right, but they do not have the expertise that defines a senior. Life experience enhances the knowledge that seniors hold.
I do not want to revisit history, so suffice it to say that a number of different reasons explain why we interpret the term senior in terms of age. Allow me to explain myself. We associate being a ``senior'' with being eligible for the Old Age Security Pension, Income Security or the QPP. And that is perfectly acceptable. However, this means that our understanding of the term ``senior'' may change over time if, as trends suggest, program reviews push eligibility over the current threshold of 65.
Should we therefore define ``senior'' solely in terms of age? Not in my view. A little later, I will discuss how our understanding of the term ``senior'' is also culturally specific. For your average person, however, seniors can be split into several categories. In French, we refer to these categories as the third age, the fourth age and the fifth age, with the youngest seniors being in the third age. With today's longevity, we may soon have to add a sixth age. However, the definition of these categories varies from one region of Canada to the next.
Quebecers can become members of the FADOQ, the Fédération des clubs d'âge d'or du Québec, at 50 and a number of people therefore define seniors as those over 50. The United Nations define seniors as those over 55. Around the world, a variety of political, socioeconomic, and morphological factors are used to define seniors. In certain African countries, a beard signifies that a man is a senior, that he is wise. This means that a young man of 30 could be considered a senior if he had a beard.
Although my example may be clumsy, it serves to underscore how difficult it is to define senior. Nevertheless, we need to have criteria to define eligibility for government programs and services for seniors. Obviously, any reference to age in the criteria must be reviewed regularly to reflect changes in life expectancy. The 50-year-old of 1960 is today 70 years old — and that is a medical fact. Our approach will have to change and advances in medical science will make the difference between seniors and the elderly all the greater. I hope that my explanation has been clear.
Now let us turn to the diversity of Canada seniors. A number of witnesses that appeared before you spoke about Canada's diversity. The situation of Canada's aboriginal population illustrates this point. Unfortunately, governments tend to develop blanket policies and programs that were applied A mari usque ad mare. However, geographic, social, economic, cultural and ethnic differences require an innovative and flexible approach. The needs of a senior in Newfoundland and Labrador are different from those of a senior in Nunavut, Quebec or Alberta.
A new political culture is needed in the House of Commons so that we can standardize criteria while at the same time respect diversity. We must also remember that seniors are not all the same age. Tough battles lie ahead.
Your briefing notes refer to the National Framework on Aging. I consider myself something of an expert on seniors and aging in Canada, but I had never heard of your framework. I spoke to other people who are extremely active in the sector, but none of them had heard of it either.
This brings me to another issue: strategic approaches.
One of the shortcomings that we have criticized for a number of years is the lack of cooperation between different stakeholders working on seniors' issues. We believe that part of the solution would be for the federal government to implement an outreach strategy targeting seniors and their representatives.
How can it be that we had not heard of the National Framework on Aging? How can it be that in 2007 we do not have a federal department for seniors for coordinating and centralizing the various services available to Canadian seniors?
The very fact that we have to ask these questions shows that there is a problem. Why do we have to engage in ethic battles just to get tools that we need to meet 21st century needs? The problem of Canada's aging population is not a new one; we have been talking about it for the past 30 years. There used to be a federal department for seniors. Seniors supported this initiative. It was both quicker and easier to be directed to the right service.
The federal government should perhaps follow the example of the Quebec government, which has a Department for Families and Seniors. It has greatly facilitated interdepartmental cooperation and has given a voice to seniors. When will we get a federal department for seniors?
I would now like to move on to my final point, the role of the federal government.
The federal government, while respecting provincial jurisdiction, should assume a leadership role with regard to seniors and the aging population. It ought to lead by example and be a model for the provinces and territories. How can it be that there is still no national policy on setting up independent seniors councils in all Canadian provinces?
Now that the National Seniors Council is up and running, the federal government ought to seize the opportunity to work with the provinces to develop a common vision and define provincial and territorial responsibilities with regard to seniors councils. Quebec and New Brunswick are the only provinces that have independent seniors councils that are able to influence policies and programs for seniors.
This constitutes a significant weakness and undermines our capacity to intervene elsewhere in Canada. Even if the government cannot impose a similar system nation-wide, it could, at the very least, strongly encourage the other governments to follow the example of these two provinces. It remains to be seen how much latitude will be given to the National Seniors Council.
[English]
The Chairman: I found it interesting that you talked about the need for a national policy. You said that we should have a department on seniors. Currently, as you know, we have a Minister of State for Seniors and we had one in the previous administration well. Do you think that there should be a full department under a minister rather than a secretary of state only who reports to another department? Should it be like the one in Quebec, which is associated with a department of family, or should it be separate and apart from any other jurisdictional implications?
[Translation]
Mr. Saint-Gelais: My answer to that question is unequivocal. There ought to be a stand-alone federal department for seniors. It should be separate from departments such as families, health or human resources. We ought to have a stand-alone federal department for seniors to coordinate all issues relating to seniors. Given that, in 2007, we are faced with an aging population and growing needs, there is a clear role for such a department.
In today's society, the number one difficulty which seniors are confronted is the following: anybody who wants to get information from the federal government has to choose amongst 98 offices or 75 telephone numbers. It is unfathomable that this is how we still operate. We need to have a one-stop shop, the federal department.
As you may recall, under a previous Conservative administration, Canada had a department of seniors, headed by the then minister for seniors, Ms. Vézina. We recently asked Ms. Vézina for her thoughts on the subject. Like the seniors with whom we spoke, she said that, when there is a department for seniors, it was easy to access information about all subjects concerning seniors. People simply had to contact one of the department's gateways, and staff would look up information and answer the question.
That is what we have requested and that is what we want.
[English]
The Chairman: My second question relates to income support specifically. I believe you heard Senator Murray earlier and it is fair to say that this issue concerns all of us. We want to ensure that seniors have adequate incomes upon which to live. Currently, many seniors receive the Old Age Pension and some receive the Quebec Pension Plan or the Canada Pension Plan. Some qualify for the Guaranteed Income Supplement under OAS. Senator Cordy has put on the record in the past that as many as 300,000 Canadians or more may qualify for the GIS but do not receive the supplement for a variety of reasons. They might not know they are eligible and, therefore, have not applied for it. Has it been your on-the-ground experience that a great number of seniors who are entitled to the GIS simply do not receive it?
[Translation]
Mr. Saint-Gelais: Yes, there are indeed a significant number of people who do not receive the guaranteed income supplement. Some do not even know that it exists while others are unable to fill out the required forms.
The association of Quebec Seniors Regional Consultation Groups has sent both the federal government and the provincial department for seniors in Quebec a resolution requesting that a GIS eligibility evaluation be carried out automatically whenever a person is 65 or over files an application form for old age security benefits.
Eligibility is determined using the person's tax return. The government therefore already has all the necessary tools to make a decision — it is simply a matter of automating and thereby simplifying the process.
Second, if somebody is not eligible for the guaranteed income supplement at 65 but, for some other reason, becomes eligible at 68 or 70, they too should receive their benefits automatically. As soon as the government receives a tax return from somebody in this situation, it should study it with the automated system and automatically send out any benefit to which the person is entitled.
The process is very simple. I used to work in IT. The government would just have to explain the principle to its public servants and the whole system could be up and running in a few hours. I cannot fathom why we still have not managed to do it, even although we have been talking about it for 15 years.
[English]
The Chairman: We have amended the legislation recently so I hope it will begin to happen. We have heard frequently that a number of people do not file income tax returns. Particularly, many Aboriginal people do not file income tax returns. Yet, many seniors are entitled to the GIS if someone helped them to fill out the application because the forms are rarely available to them in the languages in which they read and write. We understand that the situation might not only apply to those who speak Inuktitut or Cree but it might also apply to people who have immigrated to Canada and have not learned either French or English. Many people new to this country have kept their traditional language, such as Italian, Spanish or other. Should the federal government produce these relevant materials in more than our two official languages?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: For sure. We have a bilingual policy in Canada for French and English. We will not argue if the policy is well applied across the country; at least it exists. However, we face another reality.
[Translation]
The other situation that must be addressed is Canada's high level of immigration. Immigrants come here from the four corners of the globe and speak a host of different languages. A number of ethnic communities have been established in Canada for many years. Members of these communities would benefit from having documents available in their language — take, for example, the Chinese, Japanese and German communities. I believe that it is essential that this service is available to them. Obviously, such an initiative would cost money and additional tax dollars would probably have to be collected to fund it. However, this is the reality that we face.
Similarly, we have to face up to the reality of an aging population, a trend that is particularly evident in Quebec and Eastern Canada, and there is no alternative but to provide funding.
Senator Chaput: As you know, I am from Manitoba. I was unaware of the existence of the Quebec Seniors Regional Cooperation Groups. Your organization chart is quite fascinating. Where does the Quebec Federation of Senior Citizens fit into this chart? Is it considered as a coalition or is it part of a group?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: FADOQ, the Quebec Federation of Senior Citizens, is one of 5,000 seniors groups, associations and organizations in Quebec. It is the one with which people are most familiar because it has the highest profile. However, the GM Retirees Association is a very important organization, as is the AREQ, the Retired Teachers of Quebec Association.
We currently know of more than 5,800 seniors organizations in Quebec and we discover new ones all the time. The Association of the Quebec Seniors Regional Consultation Groups is an umbrella organization for all of these different groups.
Senator Chaput: How often do you meet? Do you hold annual meetings?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: Our association meets twice a year. The individual regional groups meet either once a month or once every two months, depending on where they are situated.
The Quebec government subsidizes the operational costs of the consultation groups. As you can imagine, the $25,000 that the provincial government provides is not enough for the consultation group representing Quebec's far north to hold two meetings. We in Estrie, on the other hand, can have a monthly meeting because the funding allocation covers our costs.
Senator Chaput: How many members does the national seniors' council have?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: The National Seniors Council is an independent organization that advises the government on all issues related to seniors. In order to be able to table reports at the National Assembly, it has to report to a minister. That is therefore the required operational structure.
The provincial seniors' council comprises 18 members, of whom 12 are voting members, and six are from various departments that work with seniors. I am sure that Mr. Georges Lalande, the President of the seniors' Council, would be delighted to explain all of this to you, were you to invite him to appear before your committee.
Senator Chaput: When I looked at the provincial organization chart, which shows everything that is done in Quebec, I also noted that there is a similar model in place in New Brunswick. Is that correct?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: Yes, at the senior's Council level.
Senator Chaput: Do you deal with the federal government primarily through your seniors' Council?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: That remains to be seen. Our seniors' Council has contacts in other seniors' councils around the country. The contacts that we in the Association of Regional Consultation Groups have are those that we have made with federal decision-makers.
When I was president of the association, I made a number of contacts and it was through those contacts that I found out about this special senate committee. I then went about getting myself an invitation so that I could talk to you about our organization and the difficulties that seniors face.
Senator Chaput: And if you had to make one recommendation to us, it would be that we create a department for seniors. Is that correct?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: Yes, a department for seniors housing all services for seniors.
The first interim report mentions six or eight departments involved with seniors at the federal level, but I noticed that the Department of Justice was not on the list. However, the Department of Justice is involved in all matters relating to elder abuse. It is therefore surprising that the Department of Justice is not listed as one of the departments involved. As the vice-chair of the Canadian Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse, I know that the national network has to work with the provincial and territorial justice departments if it wants to succeed.
It is the Department of Justice that is responsible for matters relating to elder abuse in all provinces. The same is true at the federal level. Even funding requests have to be submitted to the Department of Justice. The Canadian network was first set up some 12 years ago, and for the last four years we have tried to re-launch our activities in the guise of a new network, but because of the lack of funding, we are running out of steam.
We do not have a cent to our name and it is only thanks to the generosity of the British Columbian government, that allows us to use its phone lines free of charge, that we are able to hold our board meetings once a month by teleconference. It would be nice if one day we were given funding so that we could meet face to face to discuss the important issue of elder abuse and mistreatment.
Senator Chaput: Are you talking about the Quebec network for the prevention of elder abuse?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: That is the Quebec one. I am talking about the Canadian one, not the Quebec one, because we are talking about the entire country.
Senator Chaput: I just wanted to make sure that I understood you. How many networks are there in Canada? You have spoken about one in British Columbia and one in Quebec.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: All of the provinces and territories are currently involved in the CNPA. Some networks are more developed that others, but everybody is involved.
[English]
The Chairman: To let the committee know, we cannot find the witness from the Alberta Council on Aging, so Mr. Saint-Gelais will be our only witness in this panel.
You may have heard our discussions on Bill C-31, the new electoral bill. What is your reaction to having birthdates published on electoral lists?
[Translation]
Mr. Saint-Gelais: I will give you my personal opinion, because I cannot speak on behalf of all seniors. I believe that it is always dangerous to publish any information that will allow people to be more easily identified.
As soon as you start publishing birthdates on the electoral list, you face the risk of people using that information to take advantage of seniors or tract seniors or vulnerable people. I would proceed with caution in that regard. Personally, I do not think that birthdates should be published, but it is the Elections Act that stipulates how voters should be identified to ensure that no mistakes are made when people go to vote. However, I think that you should look for other solutions.
[English]
Senator Cordy: Thank you for all the information you have given us today. I want to look at the whole issue of mandatory retirement and whether we should have no mandatory retirement so people can stay in the workplace. If we were to eliminate the age of retirement, or mandatory retirement, what challenges would we need to meet and provide for within the workplace for people staying beyond the age of 65?
When I grew up in Cape Breton, the two main industries were coal mining and steel making, so not many people wanted to stay in these labour-intensive industries beyond the age of 65. On one hand, I say we should not have the mandatory retirement age, but on the other hand, I am concerned that if we do not, we may erode benefits to those who wish to retire at the age of 65. Would you comment on the issue of mandatory retirement?
[Translation]
Mr. Saint-Gelais: There is no simple answer to that question. My initial reaction would be that there should be no mandatory retirement age. People should be allowed to take their retirement when they see fit. However, if that were the case, it would be more difficult to determine eligibility for federal programs, because at the moment age criteria are used. It is 60 for some programs, 65 for others, and 70 for transferring an RRSP to a Registered Retirement Savings Fund.
In other words, you end up with ageism. In an ideal world, there would be no ageism, but what criteria could then be used? Should it be, as was proposed, the mental and physical wellbeing of a person, and not his or her age? Perhaps that is the solution. Clearly, it will be very difficult to set criteria and develop policies that cater for all Canadians and meet with everybody's approval. The simplest criterion, and the one that has always been used, is age. Whether it be a program for seniors, young people or families, age always ends up being used as a criterion.
Although I have no magic solution to offer you, I believe it is important to take the time to seriously evaluate the possibility of determining eligibility based on a combination of both age groups — for example those aged between 65 and 72 —, and the mental and physical wellbeing of the person. That way we might be able to please everybody.
[English]
Senator Cordy: If we will not have mandatory retirement age, what can we do to help those who might choose to stay in the workplace longer? I look at that in terms of private pension plans, as an example, where they receive their pension based on their best five years of employment. If a senior wanted to stay in the workforce — perhaps work 50 per cent or 60 per cent of the time — at this point in time, that is not feasible. They would be penalized because they would receive a lower salary. Are there changes we need to make if we remove mandatory retirement so people are not penalized?
[Translation]
Mr. Saint-Gelais: This whole question ties into retirement age and whether eligibility for the federal government pension plan should be based on the same criteria as eligibility for a private pension plan. Obviously, some rules and criteria have to be reviewed to better meet the needs of certain people. Earlier, I spoke about the possibility of considering both the mental and physical wellbeing of a person and her age. That would be my first answer.
Second — and this also answers Senator Carstairs' question on income levels — the government needs to ensure that the sum of each senior's benefits, including income security and federal, provincial and private pension payments, place him or her at least over the poverty threshold, as defined by the Government of Canada. That is not currently the case. This disparity has to be corrected to help the poorest and most vulnerable in our society. Women often fall into this category, particularly those who were not in the paid workforce and do not therefore have a work pension; they have to survive on the Old Age Pension and the Guaranteed Income Supplement. The combination of both still leaves them below the poverty threshold. Yet these women helped build the society, like everybody else, they deserve to have enough to at least put them over the poverty threshold. That is my personal opinion, but I imagine that it is shared by many.
Senator Murray: I fully share your concern with regard to respecting recognized jurisdictions. It is not only a matter of constitutional power sharing, it also concerns program effectiveness. In my opinion, the famous subsidiarity principle is still valid today. That is why I wonder about your recommendation for a federal department for seniors.
The briefing notes that our analysts provided inform us that Quebec was not involved in drafting the National Framework in Aging. Quebec stated that while it supported the vision and the principles set out by the other governments, it wished to assume full responsibility for health and social services.
This leads me to conclude that Quebec would oppose the establishment of a department for seniors, as you have recommended today.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: You are putting me in a rather awkward situation, because I cannot speak on behalf of the Government of Quebec; I can, however, speak for the various Quebec seniors groups and associations who, as is clear from the resolution sent to the federal government, want a department for seniors. While I am disappointed that the Government of Quebec took this position on the National Framework on Aging, I am sure that there is an explanation. You would have to ask those who made that decision why they saw fit to do so.
Senator Murray: That has been Quebec's traditional position.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: In the answer you spoke of Quebec seniors' health. Unfortunately, we tend to link the problem of aging — note that I say the problem of aging — to seniors' health. But you must realize that initially, aging is not a problem, it is a reality. It is not an illness, it is a reality. Everyone grows old. As we age, some things change our capacities, and most of the time, they are treated within our health-care systems, which focus on curing illness. At this point, I would like to touch on two issues: first of all, the therapeutic nature of the health-care system and the link between health and age; and second, I would like to say something about prevention.
I will give you a very short history lesson. In 1960, Jean Lesage campaigned on the slogan, ``It is time for a change.'' In his election platform, there were already a number of prevention initiatives in areas such as health, road safety and others.
I will soon be turning 65, and we are still talking about prevention. I have not seen many actual achievements in this area. I am speaking about all of the country, not just Quebec. We talk a lot about prevention, but when are we going to take the bull by the horns and introduce prevention policies that will improve both health and all other aspects of our lives. Prevention should start with youth. These days, when we see young people blowing out their eardrums with walkmans, iPods or MP3 players, we know that by the age of 40, they will have to wear hearing aids. And yet, at the present time seniors are having problems getting reimbursed for their hearing aids, because the programs that exist in some provinces and throughout the country are insufficient for the realities of 2007. These days, a digital hearing aid costs approximately $3,000, and depending on the province, people are being reimbursed somewhere between $500 and $800. The coverage is enough to pay for an analogical hearing aid with 1950s technology, more or less. All of this should be adjusted. As for prevention, the federal government should already have introduced policy and shown leadership at the national level, requiring the manufacturers of MP3 players and other devices to include volume- limiting systems on them. We see young people listening to the radio in their cars, with stereos that boast 25,000 watts per channel. These kinds of systems are used for outdoor demonstrations on Parliament Hill. In this case, we are talking about an automobile with the windows up. What will happen to these people's hearing once they turn 40? We should be doing prevention at the grassroots level, working with young people.
We should be doing the same thing for physical activity. The federal government and its leaders should require the schools to make physical education classes mandatory. The courses that introduce kids to the Internet are mandatory. Our young people are very good when it comes to surfing the net, but if you ask them to run a quarter mile, I am not so sure that they would be able to do that. Why do we not have any leadership in this area? It is a question of prevention.
The problem of obesity is getting worse and worse in Canada. If we want to stop this trend or at least slow it down, we have to set some rules, some standards. Junk food is an example of this problem, and I can give you other examples but you are already familiar with them. These are the things that we should be paying attention to.
I was speaking to you about hearing aids, and I would now like to touch on another important issue. In Canada's health-care system, as in our provincial health-care systems, two parts of the human body are not part of the system; this will come as a surprise to you, but two parts of the body are not covered: feet and teeth. Dental care, dentures and the services of a podiatrist are not covered, or are barely covered, by the Canadian health-care system. And yet, this kind of care is extremely important.
At present, the Centre of Excellence in Dentistry and Denturology at the University of Laval is about to undertake a study on the harmful effects of dentures that have not been fitted properly. How many seniors are currently suffering from malnutrition because they do not have good dentures? Either their dentures have not been fitted properly, or they have no dentures at all because they cannot afford them. Sometimes they have some coverage and receive a very small reimbursement, and so, the person has to choose between paying for rent, groceries, medications or dentures. Obviously, it is an easy decision; the person does without dentures.
Moving on to feet, how many falls are caused by poor footwear? When will the government establish rules so that shoe companies make shoes that allow people to at least stand up properly? Look at all the problems people are having with ankles, knees, hips, and backs because of poor shoes, and think of all the care that has to be provided by podiatrists so that people can at least have proper balance.
There has been a great deal of talk about falls, and a great deal of analysis has been done, as well as many studies and other forms of research — you were mentioning this earlier, Senator Keon — about falls amongst seniors. One aspect that is hardly ever discussed, and always dealt with very quickly is footwear. Just think about it for a moment. How much time do we spend standing during the course of a day? These days we have added ramps and steps nearly everywhere to make sure people do not fall, but no one has ever told them how to choose proper shoes so that they do not fall. That is the first question that we should be asking.
The federal government should be concerned about older people who are having problems with their feet or their teeth. They should at least be getting some financial support or other assistance. Within the health-care system, for example, the hospitals should have at least a podiatrist or a dentist come in from time to time to examine the patients and determine whether they need care.
We are spoon feeding people, and we are not asking ourselves why. It may just be because their teeth are so bad that they cannot chew and perhaps we should be providing them with dentures or helping them purchase some.
I am speaking generally, you may think that I am exaggerating, but we see this reality every day in the hospitals and in seniors' centres.
Senator Murray: I am very pleased that I have given Mr. Saint-Gelais the opportunity to tell us more about his views on this issue, no matter how relevant or irrelevant the answer was to my question. It was very interesting, and I would like to thank you.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: It gave me the opportunity to touch on an issue that I wanted to bring up. I had two main concerns, that one and elder abuse.
We will have to look at this issue quickly. I gave the example to Mr. Soulière, which probably was given to you last week. When it comes to elder abuse, the situation is exactly the same as was the situation 30 years ago regarding violence against women. Thirty or thirty-five years ago, people said that it did not exist, and that only a few women were assaulted from time to time. But people lobbied a great deal about this problem, and citizens mobilized as well, and now we have battered women's shelters; we have programs for women who have suffered abuse and the problem of violence against women is recognized.
Why are we not able to recognize elder abuse? Today we have reached the same point. I am ready to lead this battle right to the end because it is an issue that I believe in tremendously. This issue has not been seriously studied by any level of government. It should be studied. Time is starting to become of the essence.
Senator Murray: You heard Ms. LeBreton's testimony today.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: I assure you, it did not fall on deaf ears.
Senator Chaput: My question has to do with elder abuse. You said that there was a network amongst the provinces, and that this network was trying to work together by means of videoconferencing, and that if British Columbia did not give you the means to do so, you would not be able to speak to each other.
How could the federal government support the provincial networks, considering that you heard the minister say that he wanted to look at the issue?
Mr. Saint-Gelais: We must simply first of all recognize and support the Canadian Network for the Prevention of Elder Abuse — the CNPEA. This is a Canada-wide network that covers all the provinces and territories.
Second, the federal government must play a leadership role with the provinces so that they support the local networks within each province. This would provide the infrastructure that is needed. It would be similar to what you see in the document that I provided you with, which shows what Quebec has done for seniors. If we did the same thing for elder abuse, we would start at the regional level, then we would go up to the provincial level and have a network there, and we would also have a network at the federal level. We must not forget that there is an international network called the INPEA, the International Network to Prevent Elder Abuse, which has ties to the WHO.
This network was able to get the UN to designate June 15 as the World Elder Abuse Awareness Day. This year, the event will still be celebrated. Last year, some members of the Canadian network went to the United Nations in New York to attend the ceremony. It was the first year. This year, the event is being held in Geneva. Unfortunately, since we do not have the resources, probably no one from Canada will be going there. For the time being, we have not been able to find anyone to attend. But it is a very important day. And the federal government should be playing a leadership role in this area. Senator LeBreton was speaking about this earlier, and I promise that I will be the first person to join her and help make her even more aware of this very important day, just as each year we have the International Day of Older Persons. At the UN they use the expression ``Older Persons'' but in Quebec people say ``seniors.''
The pin that I am wearing was designed for the International Day of Older Persons. It was designed by Quebec, and was accepted at the international level. The purpose of the event is to encourage people to realize the importance of seniors within today's society. There are more and more of us, and the resources will have to be found so that at least the participation of seniors is recognized.
We must always bear in mind that it were not for seniors — and now I myself am one — today's society would not exist. It is important for us to have at least some small form of recognition for them. As for Senator LeBreton, her title is Secretary of State for seniors, and I call that having a secondary role.
Senator Murray: Why? It is exactly what you have in mind for a department, coordinating the activities of the other groups.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: I will explain why.
Senator Murray: It is the role that Ms. Vezina played in the old days.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: Ms. Vezina's title was Minister responsible for Seniors.
Senator Murray: Minister of State. She was a colleague of mine. I know her very well, and she has been a friend of mine for many years.
Mr. Saint-Gelais: Perhaps I was misinformed. That can happen. A Secretary of State does not have as important a role as a minister in cabinet. I am not saying that the person would not be charismatic or would not have sufficient stature to be recognized as a minister. However, a Secretary of State is not a minister at the same level as the others, someone who can discuss issues and insists upon the rights of his stakeholders the way a minister of Health can. Perhaps we ordinary people misunderstand. If so, you would have to correct us.
Senator Murray: Senator LeBreton — I am not a member of her party — is already a minister given that she is the leader of the government in the Senate. The Prime Minister asked her to serve as Secretary of State responsible for seniors. There is no department, of course, but her mandate is to coordinate the activities of various federal government departments and agencies in the area of seniors. I assure you that she is a senior minister within the Harper government. She sits on the Priorities and Planning Committee and all the important government committees, unless I am mistaken.
[English]
The Chairman: Yes, I think it is fair to say that while Senator LeBreton is a senior minister, she is not a senior minister for seniors. She is a senior minister because she is the Leader of the Government in the Senate, and that puts her in a unique situation. She is a senior minister because of her responsibility for the Senate and she is a junior minister, if you will, in terms of her responsibility for seniors. However, because Senator LeBreton has the senior ministry status, she has more influence, I would suggest to you, than if we had only a Secretary of State for Seniors and that person did not have a senior ministerial portfolio as well.
Mr. Saint-Gelais, I want to thank you very much. I related to a great number of things you said. I was particularly interested in your comments about hearing aids, as someone who wears two digital hearing aids, the last of which cost me $5,200 for the pair. I know that digital hearing aids are well out of reach of the vast majority of Canadians. I am lucky enough to be able to afford to wear them, and I received all of a $600 credit from my insurance coverage in the Senate to pay for them, but that is not the status for the vast majority of Canadians. Digital hearing aids, in my view, having worn regular hearing aids, are superior if one wants to have quality of hearing in one's life.
I was amused while talking to a senior friend of mine not long ago who was advised to wear a better-quality shoe, something along the lines of a running shoe. Because she was so vain, she chose to use a walker so she could continue to wear her high-heeled shoes.
Much education is needed, I suspect, about the prevention of falls and the need for quality footwear. Maybe we need to have someone design quality footwear that would also be considered fashionable.
[Translation]
Mr. Saint-Gelais: I would like to add something. Perhaps the federal government should recognize podiatrists, who are trained in podiatry in the United States. In Canada, a program in podiatry is now offered in Trois-Rivières, and the first cohort will be graduating next year. However, these podiatrists are not recognized as physicians in Canada. In the United States, they are entitled to carry out surgery in operating rooms, but not in Canada or in Quebec. So that is one example of how some things are not included within the health-care system.
[English]
The Chairman: You are absolutely right.
Thank you for coming. I apologize for the small disruption at the beginning of your presentation. We were delighted to have you here and I can assure you that we listened carefully to your testimony.
The committee adjourned.