Finance Committee on Oct. 5th, 2010

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to our guests here this morning.

I also wanted to echo my appreciation to the hospice and palliative care association. I come from the central Okanagan, where we have the largest demographic per capita in a census metropolitan area. So we have lots of seniors and people retiring and those looking after their aging parents as well—and definitely active seniors. We had a national seniors day recently and I was visiting one of our senior centres. There were all kinds of activities going on. I hope they stay healthy for many years and enjoy that chapter of life.

I appreciate the work you do. As my colleague Mr. Menzies said, it wouldn't be possible without the volunteers. They have a waiting list in our hospice centre. It's phenomenal the couple of hundred volunteers and people who get called out in the middle of the night to be with people in their last hours. It's a gift and a blessing to have them. So thank you for your work and the association, which I support.

Also, to the Canadian Association of Speech-Language Pathologists and Audiologists, my wife works for a laryngologist and I've been very familiar with the profession for many years. As a youth I had a hole in my ear drum, so I've had three operations and been fortunate to repair a lot of my hearing, but I still have a hearing loss. I appreciate your efforts as an association in support of International Literacy Day as well, given the importance of hearing and speech going together and literacy for productivity in our country and around the world.

In your recommendations 1 and 2, you mention that current practice is inconsistent. Picking up on the comments of my colleague, Mr. Pacetti, you mentioned that you'd like to have earlier identification and intervention in young children. Could you define what you meant by that age, and how do you envision those programs looking?

[Gillian Barnes]

Well, in terms of the universal newborn hearing screen, we're talking about babies at birth being screened for their hearing. That's what we would like to see.

In terms of early identification for speech and language issues, we have identified that at least at six months of age children can be screened, and before they are two or two and a half years of age.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Do you have any budgeting? Do you have any idea what that would cost?

[Gillian Barnes]

In terms of the universal newborn hearing screen, we're estimating that the program would cost about $14 million per year. In terms of speech and language, at this point, from the numbers we have, we know that Ontario spends $45 million on its preschool program. So we're guesstimating a cost of about $100 million for a federal program on that.

[Ron Cannan, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you, and continue the great work.

We'll move over to Ms. Eng. Obviously, with the active seniors, we have a very active CARP association. It's been expanding and growing, and I've been working with them. In your recommendation, you talk about increasing OAS and GIS, and you commented about people being house rich and cash poor, or asset rich and cash poor. We see many such seniors come to my constituency office, and my staff deal with their situation, especially when one of the spouses passes away. You had two steady incomes and now one income but still the same fixed costs. So it's a real challenge that we have identified.

You say that we should increase OAS and GIS substantially. Maybe you could elaborate on what you mean by “substantial”.

[Susan Eng]

Absolutely. Thank you for the question.

In fact, I had one CARP member speak to me specifically about that one point. She was not poorly off but was recently widowed and did not have any CPP to rely on and her husband did not have a pension. So she was relying entirely on her OAS and she wasn't at the point where she was going to have to depend on GIS. However, she was having difficulty making ends meet, and I said, “Well, what would you like to happen?” She said, “If you increase the OAS, it gets clawed back anyway as you reach the higher income levels.” But it would immediately help her and the exact situation you have described.

When I talk about substantial, I think it's important to see how OAS rates have compared with the general standard of living. The numbers, if I can get them quickly, indicate that compared to the general standard of living, the OAS has actually fallen in relation to that. So the base benefit itself is falling in relation to what it should be against the general standard of living. So we would be talking about a significant increase of that, in the range of 10% or more, just to get back on track with providing adequate incomes for those who need it, because, remember, it's clawed back at the other end.

In order to specifically target those people who absolutely need it, it would be the GIS.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Thank you, Mr. Cannan.

We'll go to Mr. Pacetti for a brief round, please.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you.

Quickly, Ms. Barnes. So recommendation number one and number two were what you were replying to Mr. Cannan.... The first one costs $100 million and the second one $25 million?

[Gillian Barnes]

No, pardon me, the first one is $15 million for the universal newborn hearing screen. The second recommendation would be $100 million.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Okay.

How would you deliver the first one, the universal newborn hearing screen?

[Gillian Barnes]

We would ask for that program to be implemented nationally, and in terms of implementation I'm going to call--

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

You had mentioned in your prior response that perhaps pediatricians or some kind of medical--

[Gillian Barnes]

That was for identification of early speech and language issues, yes, absolutely.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

I'm just trying to understand, because part of this is through the health system, so part of it would be, obviously, provincial jurisdiction.

[Gillian Barnes]

Yes, but we believe there's a role for the federal government--to take a leadership role in this.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

I have no problem with that, but some people around the table will have a problem with that. I just want to make it perhaps more clear as to what we can recommend so that everybody would be able to agree. That's why I'm asking.

A national program that ensures universal access to newborn hearing screening--nobody would be against something like that. But I'm just wondering what the delivery mechanism would be. Again, if you chose Quebec as an example, there are a few ways.... It would be either through the health services or it could be through the CLSCs or hospitals, or through the day cares. All that is provincial jurisdiction. So one of the areas would be just a transfer of the money dedicated for this purpose. I don't know if that would work.

The other problem is in recommendation number two. Again, most of the institutions that would deal with the early identification and intervention in speech and language...it would be once they got into schools. Again, it would be delivered through the schools, and I would see a problem with that as well.

[Gillian Barnes]

Actually, there are preschool programs through a variety of either health authorities or specialized programs that actually just work with preschool children for identification and early intervention.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Has there ever been a meeting or a round table or a task force or anything that has come up with some solutions? Or would that be the first step?

[Ondina Love, Executive Director, Canadian Association of Speech-Language Pathologists and Audiologists]

There hasn't at this point, and that may be a good first step. We recognize that we have to work in conjunction with the provincial and territorial associations for the implementation of this, because some provinces have actually done a good job. Quebec announced a program a few years ago. However, it's still to be rolled out. But they anticipate that the cost is about $35 per test, and initially Quebec is recommending about $5 million to get everything up and running for the equipment. In their report, they said there'd be a net benefit of $1.6 million per year to society, and that's just for the newborn hearing screening program portion of it.

Right now, the U.S. has 95% of all infants being screened for hearing, and it's done state by state. It would be the same thing, the federal government taking a national lead on it, and then providing some funding mechanism for the provinces to access, to ensure appropriate implementation.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Ninety-five per cent? How do they do that? How do they have 95% testing?

[Ondina Love]

They have a universal newborn hearing screening program.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

At the hospitals?

[Ondina Love]

It's done at the hospitals when the babies are born, by screeners or by nurses.

[Massimo Pacetti, Liberal, Saint-Léonard—Saint-Michel, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, James Rajotte]

Mr. Pacetti, I have a number of questions. I have probably too many questions for the time allowed. But I did want to pose some questions to Mr. Whittaker.

Mr. Whittaker, I come from a province obviously that's very heavy in oil and gas. But it's also a province that generates a lot of electricity through wind power. If you go down to Mr. Menzies' riding, there's a lot of wind turbines down there generating a lot of electricity. I think the City of Calgary gets about 13% of its electrical generation from wind.

I want to put some challenges on the table that I get when I say I'd like to see more wind power in Canada, both as an absolute amount and as a per cent amount. People say that's a good goal, but wind is an intermittent source; it needs to be complemented with another source. Obviously, in Quebec or B.C. or Manitoba, hydro is a perfect complement. In Alberta, they're stuck for another complement. So in Alberta, Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan it is complemented with coal. Obviously, people who are concerned about emissions are concerned about that.

The other concern raised is about the storage of wind power; it doesn't store as well as other generating sources. So I want you to address that.

Transportation of energy is an issue with any form of energy, especially for electrical generation.

The other concern raised is expense, about cost, that it will be such a high cost in kilowatts per hour as an ongoing subsidy and this will never come down. I think the proponents would say that it would have to go up initially, and then once there's adoption of enough turbines actually out there, the costs would come down.

But those are the concerns raised, and I wanted to put them on the table and then have you address them as much as you can here. If there's further information, I'd certainly appreciate that.