Maurice Dumas

[Old Age Security, March 9th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, yesterday, in a surprising declaration, the Minister of Human Resources Development clearly stated for the first time his desire for an in-depth reform of the old age security system. He even had the nerve and arrogance to confront Canadians with an odious choice: to either finance the pension system or provide training programs for young people.

Could the minister, remembering what he and his colleagues said when they were in opposition, stop stirring up people's emotions by giving Canadians an indecent choice between old age security and youth training programs?

[Social Security System, February 3rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to answer the question of my hon. colleague of the Reform Party. I have to admit that what I dealt with in my comments pertains more specifically to Quebec. But since I am the official opposition critic for all senior citizens in Canada, I would certainly not advocate anything detrimental to other provinces. Those things we suggest for Quebec, which is still part of Canada as far as I know, apply as well to the other provinces.

When Quebec is a sovereign nation, as I hope it will be in the coming years, we will stop paying taxes to Canada at some point. We will then be able to afford the same services our senior citizens get right now.

[Social Security System, February 3rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I listened with great interest to the remarks of my colleague opposite. There is something I need to point out to him. When the Coalition des aînés met in Montreal, in the riding of my hon. colleague from Notre-Dame-de-Grâce, I had the pleasure of meeting, at the Golden Age, members of this organization which brings together various associations of senior citizens and retired workers in the province of Quebec. These people are very much afraid of seeing either their pensions or the services they receive cut. By the way, I want tell my colleague from Notre-Dame-de-Grâce that it is with great pleasure that I visited this huge centre where seniors can go to take part in recreational activities or to receive health care and other types of services.

I must tell my colleague opposite that we, members of the Bloc, do not want any cuts that would affect seniors. It is the same with transfers to the provinces. The amount of money transferred to Quebec must remain at the present level. We do not want any change in these transfers.

[Social Security System, February 3rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I would also like to point out that half of our seniors receive income security benefits and are caught in a cycle where all they do is keep waiting for their cheques. Removing programs for the elderly, eliminating current services or lowering pension costs would not improve the lot of the elderly.

The elderly are not rich people. According to Statistics Canada, 1991 data show that almost half of retired seniors, 43.8 per cent of them, are living below the poverty line. This is a serious problem, and let us not forget that the seniors want to be a part of Canadian society.

Therefore, the government must ask one of its members to resolve that sensitive issue, because previous government measures only succeeded in keeping seniors inactive, isolating them and making them feel financially insecure.

So, to improve the quality of life of our seniors, we must make sure their living quarters suit their needs and allow them to stay at home, and lower the outrageous costs of seniors' residences, hospitals, et cetera, by providing, for example, home support, transportation services, recreational programs, and more.

We need to set up a 24 hours a day, seven days a week information system and to promote it. The federal government has released $3 million for the installation of new telephone equipment needed to answer inquiries about old age pensions. Seniors also need to be informed of the existence of such services and to be provided with other similar services related to their health, lodging, et cetera.

Additional resources are needed to reach incapacitated seniors, if necessary. As recommended by a Canadian seniors association, a standing national commission must be set up to protect the rights of seniors who want to keep on working.

Finally, I would like to remind you, Mr. Speaker, that every year seniors represent a higher percentage of our population and

that the government must take into account their active presence when it puts forward its new policies.

[Social Security System, February 3rd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour of being the critic on issues affecting seniors. This is probably because of a certain wisdom I gained along with my white hair. My field of responsibility includes issues related to andragogy, gerontology and geriatrics. These are issues which must be examined with a very human approach.

During the referendums and election campaigns in Quebec, the opponents of sovereignty for Quebec took advantage of the insecurity of some older people and tried to scare them by saying that they would lose their old age security pension if Quebec became a sovereign nation, arguing that the government of the province would no longer be able to pay for their pension.

Thank goodness, many seniors no longer believe those lies. The results of the 1992 referendum in Quebec as well as the election of 54 members of the Bloc Quebecois are obvious proof of that.

The issues concerning seniors are partially dealt with by two departments: Human Resources Development and Health, as well as by the Seniors Secretariat, which is responsible for

providing to seniors information on federal programs and services, while also ensuring liaison with federal and provincial departments implementing programs for seniors.

Also, the National Advisory Council on Aging advises and helps the Minister of Health regarding the quality of life of seniors, either when the minister submits issues to the Council or when the Council itself decides to act on its own. Its role is to circulate information and, among others tasks, to publish reports.

So, why is there no secretary of state responsible for issues relating to seniors, since this is an area of vital importance?

Recent studies reveal that one person in eight is over 65 years of age. In the next ten years, the number of people over 65 will increase by at least 40 per cent.

The baby boomers are now in their forties. In 1981, 19 per cent of Canadians over 65 years of age were in their eighties. In 2001, that is 20 years later, this proportion will be 24 per cent. Life expectancy is increasing, along with related problems.

More and more people over 65 years of age will have to rely on the ability to pay of those workers aged 15 to 64. Around the year 2011, for the first time ever, there will be more older people than persons aged 15 or less. Moreover, this group of older people will be better educated than today's seniors.

All these factors show us the importance of planning for the future, starting today. Of course there are many programs to help seniors, but the isolation of seniors means that most of them are completely uninformed and unable to take the necessary action to obtain this information. We absolutely must encourage seniors to be independent, by letting them join society and not by keeping them apart.

Most seniors prefer to live at home, to take care of themselves and to make their own decisions about their life. According to journalist Monique Richer of the daily Journal de Montréal , there is a big problem among seniors: the suicide rate of people aged 65 to 80 has increased significantly in Quebec, since the suicide rate of seniors has risen from 10.1 per 100,000 in 1977 to 21.9 in 1987. Montreal has a service called ``Suicide Action Montréal'' but it seems to be little used, unlike other services for young people or other groups.

Seniors must also be given access to information on health services. Our health system is among the best in the world, but spending on health is growing faster than the population and inflation. Canada spends over $60 billion a year on health. Obviously, as people grow older, they have health problems and often lose independence as well.

Formerly, our ancestors kept old people at home with them, but today, with our new lifestyle, for both young and old, living together no longer seems possible.

We cannot improve seniors' quality of life by isolating them, nor will we save money by cutting benefits under the Canada Pension Plan, since these income changes would cost taxpayers dearly. We must not confuse old age security pensions with welfare benefits.