Human Resources Committee on June 1st, 2021

[Lise Lapointe]

Standards should indeed be set across Canada and should be maintained and monitored by the provinces. These standards should establish a quality that does not currently exist.

The working conditions of people who work with the most vulnerable should be changed. There is a need for more staff, better wages, and more personal support workers—people who provide some support. The presence of family caregivers is also needed. We saw during the pandemic that people [Technical difficulty—Editor] who were normally recognized were denied entry, which created isolation.

I would like to add that caregivers and family members have had to deal with grief. It's going to take several years to get over these bereavements, because these people have been cut off from the older person they loved and helped and have not been able to get to their bedside. In some cases, the funeral has not yet taken place. Imagine the lingering loss of that person and the grief that follows.

I do think that working conditions need to be considered in the case of people who care for vulnerable people in residential and long-term care centres, or CHSLDs, hospitals and private seniors' residences, or RPAs. In Quebec, bonuses were given during the COVID‑19 pandemic, but if these bonuses disappear, salaries will be even lower. Because the working conditions are so bad, this is not a profession that people want to work in. So they're not going to work in those environments.

People will have to be recruited, trained and, of course, well compensated. There will also have to be managers in every facility. We have heard of cases where managers were not present, often creating negative or disastrous situations. It is important that there be someone in each facility who is in charge, who can give directions, and, to use a familiar phrase, keep an eye on things. This person must also be able to make requests for their facility if necessary.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Lapointe.

Thank you, Ms. Gazan.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Next is Mr. Vis, please, for five minutes.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'll be splitting my time with MP Mazier.

Ms. Mackenzie, thank you so much for appearing before the committee today. A lot of your words really resonated with me as a British Columbian MP.

One thoughtful point that I took from your opening testimony was you said thousands came forward to help seniors. During our committee, we hear a lot about what the government can do and how much more funding would result in better outcomes on x, y or z, but we don't often talk about the role civil society and volunteers can play and want to play in our communities, and some ways that the federal government might be able to help them.

Would you have any recommendations for us about how communities can better engage civil society, those service organizations, people who want to make a difference to help seniors live their best lives, especially those who are in long-term care, or seniors who are not in long-term care and just need assistance?

[Isobel Mackenzie]

I think it starts by really understanding and respecting the contributions they can make. If you look at long-term care, we didn't value the contributions that families could make. We didn't turn to families and ask them to help us manage the care for their loved one in long-term care. We shut them out.

When we look at the community, what the pandemic has done—I live in the part of B.C. where we're worried about earthquakes—is that at the end of the day in many types of disasters, the professional help is not what is going to get you through the day and the next day; it's the neighbour across the street, or in the building. Investments need to be made in promoting those relationships and enhancing those networks.

Emergency preparedness for earthquakes, as an example, is something where it ebbs and flows. We get excited about it and we focus on it, and then our attention wanes just like, frankly, preparing for a pandemic. We get excited about it. We pay attention to it, and then our attention wanes and suddenly we find ourselves unprepared for a pandemic.

We need to recognize that there has been lots of tragedy, lots of loss—

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Thank you. We're so short on time, but thank you so much.

Over to you, Dan.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Mr. Mazier.

[Dan Mazier, Conservative, Dauphin—Swan River—Neepawa, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Brad, for sharing your time.

Thank you to the witnesses for the great testimony.

I want to bring something to your attention that I believe is important.

Many seniors cannot navigate through confusing government websites. Some do not even have Internet access due to the rural connectivity divide and affordability concerns. Many seniors in my riding rely on physical government offices to get the support they need. However, the government closed the doors to many offices such as Service Canada. This resulted in Canadians phoning government departments and agencies such as Service Canada and the CRA to get the support they needed.

An Order Paper question I submitted revealed that in April 2020 there were nearly six million calls to Service Canada call centres that were unable to even make it to the interactive voice response automated system. The Canadians who did make it through had to wait an average of two hours that month. In January of this year there were over 120,000 calls that hung up while waiting to get hold of the pension call centre. In February, there were over 135,000 and in March there were over 160,000 calls that had to hang up on the same pension call centre.

This question is for Ms. Mackenzie.

Do you believe that this is an issue for seniors, and how do you suggest the government address these accessibility concerns?

[Isobel Mackenzie]

I think the issue of how seniors access services, period, is an issue not just for the federal government but also for many private companies. Things are moving online. You have to get your bills electronically, etc. We need to understand that there is a group of people who are going to be left behind as we move toward that digital platform. We certainly saw that in COVID, because they can't navigate the system or they don't have Internet either because they can't afford it or it's not available. We do need to recognize that.

I think issues around overloaded call centres and waiting on the phone for long periods of time plagued everybody, not just people over 65. I think what's important and where the federal government can play a role is to recognize that for whatever necessary services a person might need—utilities, banks, etc.—that are federally regulated, they ensure the ability remains for some people to make connections other than through an online connection. For example, regulating that compulsory paperless isn't legal in federally regulated businesses would be helpful for seniors. They find that frustrating, and it has a whole corollary around fraud abuse as other people have to navigate online platforms for people.

When you look at seniors proportionately, they are less likely to be tech savvy than younger generations. Whether that changes in 30 years with the tech savvy cohort becoming seniors will remain to be seen, but the 85-plus of today, yes, lots can engage in Facebook and online and all the rest of it, but many can't, and we are leaving them behind a bit.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Mackenzie.

Mr. Lauzon, you have the floor for five minutes.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the witnesses wholeheartedly. I think we have the same mission, to improve the lot of those who built our country.

My first question is for Mr. Lynch from the Coalition pour la dignité des aînés.

In the presentations and in the rounds of questioning, there was a lot of talk about financial health, but almost no mention of issues related to mental health, physical health and isolation.

Mr. Lynch, you have a great deal of experience in the area of retiree and pre-retiree rights. I'd like to hear your thoughts on how to combat elder abuse.

The majority of Canadians and Quebeckers believe that elder abuse is hidden and invisible. In reality, elder abuse is present in CHSLDs, as we have seen, and just about everywhere in daily life. It is often family members or caregivers who abuse seniors physically, mentally or financially.

How can we foster safe relationships? How can we prevent violence, including abuse, against older adults? Do you think government investments are a good step in addressing elder abuse? What other ways can the government improve the lot of seniors?

[Pierre Lynch]

Thank you for your question.

Personally, I believe that we need to continue the information campaigns for the general public, to raise awareness of the importance of the phenomenon of abuse and maltreatment. It is important to continue these campaigns. These can be televised or not; the important thing is that everyone see them.

Education is also an important component. We talked about the next generations; it's important to educate them, so they know about this phenomenon. I will go even further: we must also educate the cultural communities. In Laval, there are 112 cultural communities. It is important to go to the different cultural communities and to make people aware of the abuse. Very often, elder abuse takes place within families.

More information needs to be provided. The more information people have access to, the more awareness they are going to have about this problem. Then there will be less abuse and mistreatment.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Argenteuil—La Petite-Nation, QC]

Thank you very much.

Ms. Mackenzie, you talked about aging with dignity. People want to stay at home as long as possible. As you mentioned, the pandemic brought out the desire of seniors to stay at home as long as possible, which is completely understandable. The people who were most vulnerable were those staying in long-term care facilities.

As we know, seniors do not necessarily have the supports they need to stay at home. The government has invested $90 million over three years in the new aging with dignity at home initiative to do just that. As a result, there will be services to assist and support seniors, such as home or lawn care or grocery delivery.

Do you think this is a good initiative? What could be better than investing in organizations that help our seniors?

[Isobel Mackenzie]

Yes. I think it is a good investment.

If you visualize this continuum of aging, people don't start out immediately needing total help. It's an incremental process as we age. We need a little help around the house with some housekeeping, some groceries, some meal preparation, and then we start to need some care. It's really at the care-needing level where it is possibly going to tip over into long-term care.

When you ask what more can be done, when we're looking at trying to ensure that people can stay at home and not go into the nursing home, yes, the independent activities of daily living, the IADLs, are important, but it becomes critical to have the care for the activities of daily living as well: the bathing, the feeding, the helping to the toilet, medication management. That's where we're coming up short, in part because, in the federated model, the federal government gives money to the provinces and the provinces decide what the province is going to cover for you. You have a hodgepodge. Some people include housekeeping, some people don't, and also what they charge for it.

In B.C., we charge quite a bit for our public home support. A person living on $28,000 a year, who needs a one-hour daily visit, is going to pay $8,000 a year for their public home support. In Alberta, it's free. In Ontario, it's free. In Quebec, there is a fee for it, but it's rebated a bit through income tax, and it's the same, I think, in Manitoba. It's all over the map. I think there is a role for the federal government to play in saying that, as a Canadian citizen, these are the services you are entitled to receive from your government at home, and this is how much you are expected to pay based on your income. It should be the same, and it's all over the map.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you very much, Ms. Mackenzie. That's probably an excellent place to leave it.

We have arrived at the appointed hour. Although we'd love to continue this discussion, we won't have the resources that we need to extend the meeting, so we have to wrap it up.

It has been an excellent and thorough discussion.

We greatly appreciate your statements, expertise and work in your respective provinces. Thank you very much for being with us and sharing your testimony with us.

Thank you so much to everyone.

We are now at 6:30, so we'll have to adjourn for the day, but we are very grateful to you for your contribution to the study.

Thanks to everyone.

The meeting is adjourned.