Maurice Dumas

[Old Age Security Act, May 8th, 1995]

moved:

Motion No. 8

That Bill C-54 be amended by deleting Clause 25.

[Old Age Security Act, May 8th, 1995]

moved:

Motion No. 1

That Bill C-54, in Clause 1, be amended by deleting lines 11 to 16, on page 1.

[Divorce Act, May 4th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to speak on Bill C-232, an act to amend the Divorce Act. The aim of this bill is to relieve grandparents of the obligation to obtain special leave from the courts to apply for a provisional, permanent or amended court order for the custody of the children or access to them.

At the moment, the Divorce Act contains no provision for grandparents' rights. Grandparents wishing to obtain custody of their grandchildren now must first apply to the courts for leave to debate the custody of their grandchildren.

This bill would entitle grandparents to obtain information on the health, education and welfare of the child. It also provides that the amendments to the Divorce Act would be subject to review by a parliamentary committee four years after their coming into force.

Bill C-232 would eliminate the need for grandparents to make this initial application and would enable them to be a party to the dispute.

Parents divorce, but children do not. Today's family is considerably different from yesterday's. The patriarchal family of the past has changed and become mobile and temporary. With divorces, common-law unions and other arrangements, the family tree has been uprooted.

The family of the year 2000 is born of the break-up of couples. The reconstituted family is a collection of members who are not all biologically related. No model exists for this new family. Each member must adjust by finding a way to function within the family unit.

Studies tend to show that children can benefit from family reconstruction, which gives them another chance.

The traditional family, when divorce did not take place, hid a lot of frustrations behind its air of respectability. However, the number of divorces still evokes some bitterness. Solutions have to be found for children to overcome their suffering, and grandparents have a vital role to play following the breakup of the family unit.

As the official opposition critic for seniors organizations, I have a keen interest in this bill, but I feel I must point out some of the shortcomings of this attempt to improve the status of grandparents.

In recent years, grandparents who were denied access to their grandchildren often asked the courts to intervene and grant them visiting rights.

A number of anglophone associations were established, including GROWTH-Grandchildren-Grandparents Right of Wholesomeness Through Heritage, GRAND-Grandparents Requesting Access and Dignity, founded in 1983 in Toronto, and the Canadian Grandparents Rights Association in British Columbia. In French, GRAND becomes GRANDIR, which stands for Grands-parents réclamant accès, nouveau départ incitant retrouvailles. These associations are asking for federal legislation that would give grandparents easier access to their grandchildren.

I think I should point out the excellent work being done by the organization Grands-parents-tendresse in Saint-Jérôme, in the riding of the hon. member for Laurentides, headed by Cécile Lampron, whose purpose is to develop intergenerational relationships by visiting schools, organizing group excursions with the children, helping young mothers after the birth of a child or during convalescence, and by offering services to single seniors.

First of all, this bill is aimed only at the children of couples who are either divorced or about to divorce. The federal government has jurisdiction over divorce proceedings, but Bill C-232 may exceed this authority. Grandparents are not directly involved in the marriage, as is the case with parents and the children born of the marriage.

Parental authority is a provincial matter, under subsection 92(13) of the Constitution Act, 1867. This is clearly an intrusion into an area under provincial jurisdiction.

Unlike Canadian common law, the access rights of grandparents to Quebec children are already provided for explicitly in Quebec's civil code. Section 611, passed in December 1980, says that the parents cannot, without good reason, prevent the

child from having a personal relationship with its grandparents. If the parties cannot agree, the terms and conditions of this relationship will be determined by the courts.

Section 611 of the Civil Code may be invoked at any time before or after the divorce of the parents. In addition, this clause does nothing to define the notion of grandparents in the Divorce Act. We presume that section 579, which states the following, takes precedence: "When adoption is granted, the effects of the preceding filiation cease". The rights of the parents of a father or a mother could be revoked at the same time as those of the biological parents.

In Quebec, section 611 resolves the issue of the grandparents' access to grandchildren and they may submit a petition at any time. Quebec has resolved this problem, but Canada's other provinces have not. Bill C-232 improves the position of grandparents and their grandchildren in other provinces, but only covers the children of married or divorced parents. As a consequence, this bill will change very little about the current laws regarding grandchildren in Quebec.

Therefore, all common law provinces should pass a law like that in effect in Quebec. We believe Quebec's legislation shows the way in this area and should be used as a model.

This bill has another shortcoming: grandparents' access to medical and school records. The Act Respecting Access to Documents Held by Public Bodies and the Protection of Personal Information is a law of Quebec governing a matter of provincial jurisdiction.

Quebec has legislative power over marriages, property and civil rights, marriage contracts, adoption, separation from bed and board, custody, etc.

Consequently, Bill C-232 increases the overlap in family law.

In addition, under subsection 92(13) of the Constitution Act, 1867, parental authority bestowed on the couple is an exclusively provincial jurisdiction. Therefore, the bill also infringes on a provincial jurisdiction.

I mentioned earlier that Bill C-232 tends to protect the rights of grandparents in the other provinces of Canada, but unfortunately, it has shortcomings and the Bloc Quebecois must point out this obvious infringement on a provincial jurisdiction.

Grandparents have an enormous role to play in the lives of their grandchildren during the years following a separation. They are exceptional compensations for the partial absence of a father or a mother. They can bring emotional and other stability to a child's life. Grandparents can often detect problems, but they cannot take part in discussions, because, often, intruding in such a way can only aggravate an already adverse climate.

In closing, the Bloc Quebecois, the official opposition, will put aside the few misgivings it has and will support Bill C-232 which was introduced by my kind colleague for Mission-Coquitlam.

[Grandparent Year Act, May 2nd, 1995]

Madam Speaker, I rise in this House to address Bill C-291, which seeks to declare, throughout Canada, 1995 as the Year of the Grandparent.

As the official opposition critic on issues concerning seniors, I am very interested in this bill which would grant grandparents the status which they deserve. Grandparents develop a special bond with their grandchildren, for whom they may represent stability in a sometime fragile environment.

Many modern families are the result of break-ups. The blended family is made up of members who do not all have the same biological links between them. There is no model for this new family; every member must adjust, so as to ensure his or her integration in the new family unit.

Grandparents play a major role during the early years, as well as during the teenage years of their grandchildren.

They can provide emotional security and stability to their grandchildren, particularly when the parents divorce or separate. Grandparents can identify problems, but they must not take part in the debate, since such an intrusion can sometimes exacerbate the situation.

Bill C-291 finally gives recognition to older people, who are often perceived as a burden in our communities. This, in turn, often leads to social isolation, feelings of uselessness, isolation, loneliness, as well as low self-esteem.

Older people play a vital role in their grandchildren's lives. To that end, grandparents need minimum economic well-being. Financial security is essential for the elderly to maintain their independence.

Seniors represent an increasingly larger part of the overall population. It is estimated that, over the next 15 years, the number of elderly will increase by 40 per cent. The government must respect our seniors and recognize their contribution. Bill C-291 seeks to recognize that contribution. It is important that grandparents have the necessary tools to provide them with a quality of life, so that they can adequately assume their role.

Let me give you a brief outlook on how Canadian seniors use their spare time. According to a document published in 1993 by the National Advisory Council of Aging, seniors participate in the following activities. In 1986, 66 per cent of seniors between the ages of 65 and 74 went to a theatre or a restaurant once a month, while this figure was 50 per cent in the case of seniors who were 75 and over. From 40 per cent to 66 per cent of seniors purchased sports equipment and related services-for playing golf, skiing, camping, home exercising-and equipment for leisure activities, including computers, compared with 83 per cent of other Canadians.

Seniors would prefer to spend money on spectator activities like the movies, concerts and sport events, as opposed to recreational equipment for the home. However, seniors spend less than all other groups on recreational activities.

Statistics also showed that 12 per cent of seniors spent money on organized holidays, while 11 per cent of younger Canadians spent money in this way. Furthermore, 58 per cent of seniors travelled outside their community in a given month. Men 60 and over watched an average 33 hours of television per week, while women in the same age group watched an average of 36 hours.

These statistics prove that seniors are not passive and can share different types of recreation with their grandchildren. However, the Bloc Quebecois has always made it clear that the federal government is trying to reduce the deficit at the expense of the most vulnerable in our society.

According to a report by the National Advisory Council on Aging, the disposable income of seniors is broken down as follows. In 1989, the average income of single persons aged 65 or over was $16,316, while the average income of single persons under the age of 65 was $23,080. A single person is someone who lives alone or in a household where he or she is not related to the other members of that household.

In 1992, the average income of single seniors was $18,434, while that of other single persons was $25,039. Nearly 21 per cent of all seniors, in other words, 625,000, live on what are considered to be low incomes. The percentage of seniors living on low incomes is always higher than in the general population.

On March 9, 1994, I addressed the following question in this House to the Minister of Human Resources Development and Minster of Western Economic Diversification, and I quote: "By making alarming statements on the old age security system, is the minister preparing to hit seniors with a considerable cut in their old age security pensions?"

The Minister of Human Resources Development responded simply that he wanted to provide a stable, effective, fair and honest system for seniors, one that Canada could afford.

Bill C-291 should be seen as recognizing the role of seniors. However, I would like to point out that I find the choice of year, that is 1995, unfortunate, since the United Nations has declared 1995 a year of tolerance. Accordingly, the Bloc Quebecois obviously supports the bill, but feels that 1996 would be a more appropriate year. Furthermore, a number of months have elapsed, significantly reducing the impact of Bill C-291.

I would also like to mention that grandparents are not all seniors. Statistics also show an upswing in the birth rate among adolescents, resulting in younger and younger grandparents. In closing, I would congratulate my colleague for Halton-Peel on Bill C-291, because it recognizes the importance of grandparents throughout Canada and pays tribute to them.

[Old Age Security, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, does the minister deny that the Department of Human Resources Development's difficulty in processing requests is creating hardship this year, mostly among seniors?

[Old Age Security, April 27th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Human Resources Development.

Since last Friday, Communication-Québec, MP's offices and even the PMO have been flooded with calls from obviously very concerned pensioners. According to the Consumer Help Office, approximately 258,000 pensioners will see their old age pension cheques reduced by 50 per cent.

How can the minister explain that so many seniors received or will receive this year a pension cheque not including the guaranteed income supplement to which they are entitled?

[Budget Implementation Act, 1995, April 6th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome this opportunity to speak this morning to the amendment proposed by the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot. This debate on Bill C-76, on provisions to implement certain changes in the 1995-96 Budget that will affect transfers to the provinces, concerns all Canadians and Quebecers.

I would like to start with a short summary of the major changes introduced by the 1995-96 Budget, after which, as the official opposition's representative for seniors organizations, I will try to show what the federal government has in mind with its plan to reduce old age pensions in 1997.

Transfers to the provinces are not changed by the 1995-96 budget. Today, there are three main transfer programs: Established Programs Financing, $21.73 billion; equalization, $8.87 billion; and the Canada Assistance Plan, $7.95 billion. The federal budget did not make any changes in the equalization program but it has extended the ceiling provision for equalization for a period of five years.

Section 48 in Bill C-76 will deprive Quebec of $650 million in 1996-97. Bill C-76 proposes new national standards for health care and provides for establishing new national standards for social assistance and post-secondary education. This new federalism does not decentralize at all. These national standards will restrict the autonomy of the provinces in their own jurisdictions.

The government is trying to minimize the significance of these cuts, although they are in fact devastating for the provincial governments, especially for Quebec. The government includes tax point transfers in its figures on cuts in transfer payments to the provinces. The federal government has no control over tax transfers paid to the provinces under its main transfer programs.

In fact, all financial transfers, cash transfers paid to the Government of Quebec, will be reduced by 32 per cent between 1994-95 and 1997-98, as a result of cuts in transfers to the provinces.

A sovereign Quebec would lose federal transfer payments but recover the $30 billion in taxes Quebecers are now paying to the federal government.

The latest budget cuts implemented by Bill C-76 will hit the most vulnerable in our society. The Quebec Minister of Finance estimates that these cuts and transfers to the provinces will reduce the federal contribution to social programs funding from 37.8 per cent to 28.5 per cent between 1994-95 and 1997-98. The federal government is intervening in areas that are under provincial jurisdiction and may make additional cuts in the cash portion of transfers to the provinces.

As the official opposition's representative for seniors organizations, I am very concerned about the old age pension reform announced by the government, which will become effective in 1997. In 1994, they said a document would be tabled very shortly, but the government has delayed production of this document, preferring to wait until after the referendum in Quebec.

In fact the government announced that the most disadvantaged seniors will not lose any protection. This means that the pensions of those defined as having high incomes will be reduced and that the reductions in their pensions will not go to raising the pensions of low income seniors, who have only the

assurance that their pensions will not be cut. So, some will have their benefits reduced and no one will receive an increase.

Another important point has to do with family income determining pension eligibility. This measure is unacceptable, since women have fought for financial independence for decades.

It is not a new measure. The government was preparing similar changes to the unemployment insurance plan as part of the social program reform. Given women's general opposition to the idea, the Liberal majority on the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development did not recommend linking benefit levels to family income levels. This is in the report by the committee on social program reform.

It is noteworthy that old age pensions have already been reduced for seniors with an income over $53,000. The Liberals decided, in the last budget, to reduce the tax credit for seniors with an income over $25,000. The federal government is continuing to go after the incomes of seniors, particularly those in the middle class.

Old age pensions are a major source of revenue for seniors. Federal government documents indicate that old age security and guaranteed income supplements accounted for 28.9 per cent of the income of single men; 41.3 per cent of the income of single women and 25.9 per cent of the income of couples, in 1989.

The government announced a review of the Canada pension plan, the CPP, for the fall. The federal and provincial finance ministers are scheduled to meet as part of the five-year review of the Canada pension plan. They will use this opportunity to claim that a review of old age pensions is mandatory.

The federal government does not have to change the old age pension system unless, that is, it wants to cut the budget at the expense of seniors.

Quebec seniors had the opportunity to state their opinions on their future at hearings of the seniors' commission on the future of Quebec. The chairperson of the committee was a minister in the former Conservative government, Monique Vézina. This consultation has shown that seniors across the country have similar concerns, mostly about their social and economic situation.

Quebec is going through a difficult economic period. Some of the witnesses at the hearings told of the problems they are having with unemployment or poverty because of the constant threat of cuts to social programs and the health care system.

Representatives of the Quebec Federation of Senior Citizens (QFSC) told the commission that their organizations were fighting the four main problems affecting seniors: the feeling of uselessness, inactivity, insecurity and isolation. Almost everywhere people are lobbying for society to guarantee seniors their rightful place. Seniors want nothing more than to use their experience for the good of the society they will leave behind for their grandchildren. It is clear that the universality of old age pensions should not be tampered with.

Lucien Bouchard, the Leader of the Official Opposition, recently shared with Quebecers his party's reaction to the federal government's position on pensioners. He said:

After hitting pensioners with annual incomes of more than $26,000 with a tax last year, the federal government has continued to go after them. The Minister of Finance has made it very clear that the universality of old age pensions is definitely a thing of the past, since in the future, pension benefits will be based on combined family income, and this will result in the loss of financial independence for thousands of women. By waiting until after the referendum to cut into social security, the federal Liberals are hiding the negative ramifications of their cuts from Quebecers. Be assured, Mr. Speaker, that the Bloc Quebecois will do its utmost to prevent the government from making the needed spending cuts at the expense of seniors, the unemployed and people who are most in need of health care, post-secondary education and social assistance.

The federal government should cut $2.85 billion more from the Department of National Defence's budget for the next three years instead of looking to seniors' programs next autumn to reduce its deficit.

You can be sure, Mr. Speaker, that, as the official opposition critic for seniors' issues, I pledge to fight any proposal the federal government might make to reduce its deficit at the expense of seniors.

[Canadian National, March 31st, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, as the official opposition pointed out during the debate on back-to-work legislation for railway employees, the Minister of Transport waited until the government had wielded its big stick before starting the process of privatizing Canadian National.

The Minister of Transport, who openly sided with the employers and against the employees in the railway dispute, was anxious to downgrade the terms and conditions of employment at CN so it would be easier to privatize the company.

The minister did not even have the decency to wait and started his privatization process less than a week after the passage of back-to-work legislation. Now more than ever before, it is clear to railway employees, and Canadians generally, that the arbitration process put in place by the Minister of Labour in the railway sector is biased towards the employer. The opposition was right to condemn this bill.

[Health Care Funding, March 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, does the minister agree with the Prime Minister who stated in Regina that these budget cuts will eliminate what he called non-essential health services, such as eyeglasses, wheelchairs and ambulances, when we know that the provinces also have to close thousands of hospital beds?

[Health Care Funding, March 24th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health. The minister stated last Friday that, in spite of substantial reductions in transfer payments to the provinces, the federal government will

keep a watchful eye on the provinces and penalize those who try to exclude essential care and services from medicare coverage.

Does the minister realize that repeated budget cuts to federal transfer payments to the provinces will force the provinces to make agonizing choices like closing thousands of beds or limiting access to costly chemotherapy treatments, at the risk of cutting back on care and services available under medicare?