Human Resources Committee on June 17th, 2021

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

At the beginning you mentioned that you cared for three COVID survivors, so I take it the three of them had COVID.

[Connie Newman]

No. One had COVID.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

What did you learn from that experience that would help us as we go forward, as far as how seniors with COVID are treated?

[Connie Newman]

For me, it goes back to communication, and I'm a communicator. I'm a communicator with all three of those housing places, those homes, and the moment I got the call that she had tested positive, the communication became paramount to our ensuring her quality of life. I can't stress that enough.

I've been fortunate. I'm tech savvy and I'm on Zoom meetings every day, sometimes twice a day. With personal care homes, we need to find a way, first, to ensure that they have Wi-Fi access. I'm starting to nag now, but if a personal care home has Wi-Fi access, that is part of the solution. It's not the paramount one.

For one of my friends in a personal care home, we ended up buying special Shaw Internet cable access for his room to ensure he could read The Globe and Mail and The New York Times online. When we think about that and his quality of life, he's stuck in there and his health got him there. I think of other people in there. He's fortunate that he has family. As decision-makers, we all need to remember that there are many older adults who don't have family living in their community, and that's why I have three of them who are not family but friends.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

A good friend you are, and thank you so much.

Mr. Chair, do I have any more time?

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

You don't have enough for a question and an answer. If you want to make a closing observation, there might be time for that.

[Kate Young, Liberal, London West, ON]

I just want to thank both of the witnesses for the fact that you're working so closely with seniors. I really thank you for what you're doing and what you're able to tell us to help us with this report.

Thank you again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Ms. Young.

Ms. Chabot, you have the floor for six minutes.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Good afternoon, Mr. Chair.

Greetings as well to the witnesses, Mr. Séguin and Ms. Newman, and thanks to them for their testimony.

My question is for Mr. Séguin.

We're quite familiar with the AQDR. We're aware of its influence in Quebec, where it operates in virtually all regions, including my own, the Laurentians.

Mr. Séguin, you talked about the survey conducted in 2020. You had the time to tell us about your recommendation that a public investigation for seniors be conducted in Quebec. However, I'd like to hear more about the impoverishment of seniors in your other recommendations and your survey.

As you know, the government has decided to take action and increase old age security benefits for seniors 75 and over starting in 2022. According to the testimony we've heard as members, seniors are still furious. We feel there's no justification for discriminating based on age.

Do you have any recommendations or a specific opinion on this issue?

[Serge Séguin]

We discussed that when we met with people from the office of the federal Minister of Seniors, and we asked them why the increase applied solely to seniors 75 and over. They implied that it was because people 65 to 74 years of age were financially better off.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Do you agree with that?

[Serge Séguin]

That's a false impression, at least for Quebec. I don't know how it is in the rest of Canada, but statistics in Quebec show that 60% of those 65 and over have incomes of less than $30,000. Consequently, it's a misconception to think that 65‑year-olds are better off than 75‑year-olds, at least in Quebec.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

In addition, I have to tell you I also tried to find conclusive data backing that up. The figures you cite for Quebec aren't far off those we received in writing yesterday. We learned, for example, that 59% of people 75 years and over have incomes of less than $30,000, compared to 50% for those 65 to 74.

So what's the reason for discriminating against a 65‑year-old relative to a 75‑year-old who earns the same amount?

[Serge Séguin]

There's one statistic that shouldn't be overlooked: 52% of workers in Quebec don't have an employer pension plan. Some of them may be able to put money into an RRSP or a TFSA to create their own pension plan, but 52% is a lot. Not everyone works for the Quebec or federal government. Not everyone works for a school board or in the health and social services system, where you can join a good government pension plan.

In my board meetings, I often remind directors that we can't just consider people who have an employer or government pension plan. We also have to think of the 52% of workers who don't have a pension.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Thank you.

Mr. Séguin, as you know, the National Assembly of Quebec is unanimously seeking health transfers equal to 35% of health spending from the federal government. We don't need additional national standards in Quebec; we need additional funding to deliver necessary resources, particularly for seniors.

Do you have a position on that?

[Serge Séguin]

We don't really see ourselves as opposing the federal government, but we want the funding allocated to Quebec for those expenditures actually to be used to fund the services that are delivered, particularly in home care and home support.

When the Liberal government was in power and Dr. Barrette was minister of health and social services, all services were reorganized and home care services were changed. An employee used to be able to go and provide a service to a senior at that person's home and to provide a subsequent service there as well. Now everything's calculated. An employee provides a single service, and if the senior needs another service, he or she must request it. However, why pay three or four employees to provide different services when you can have a single person do it all and avoid spending a lot of money doing it?

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Did your survey address home support for seniors? We've discussed it at length in committee. The home support issue obviously became more pressing for seniors during COVID‑19.

[Serge Séguin]

We've seen that many more seniors in English Canada stay at home, whereas more Quebec seniors live in CHSLDs or RPAs, the private seniors' residences.

We've been privatizing home care services for some years now by transferring them to private seniors' residences. There have also been cuts to home care services. So let's invest in care because people want to stay in their homes.

Of course, some people in their 60s really like RPAs. Once their children grow up, leave home, marry or settle in another region to pursue their education, for example, parents find themselves alone in a large house. So they decide to sell and move to paradise, to an RPA.

At the start of the pandemic, however, you would have thought RPAs were prisons that residents couldn't escape. Once they started going out for a little air, many residents decided to move and go back to living in private accommodation because they felt they were losing their independence in an RPA during an event like that.

So a change is under way. I can't give you the exact figures, but this is an emerging trend in Quebec. When a promoter building a new seniors' residence has to start advertising and going door to door, that means the option of renting in an RPA is becoming less appealing.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Séguin and Ms. Chabot.

Next we have Ms. Gazan, please, for six minutes.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Thank you so much, Chair. My first question is for a fellow Manitoban, Connie Newman.

Thank you so much for your testimony so far. It's so nice to have you in committee today.

My first question relates to public ownership. I'm wondering if you feel that Wi-Fi should be a publicly owned utility, something that's deemed as essential for everyone as water, for example, as a public utility.

I ask that because you spoke a lot about Wi-Fi and the fact that many seniors don't have access to Wi-Fi. Actually, I wanted to mention article 27 of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which states, “Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.”

One of the concerns I've had in Winnipeg Centre for many seniors is that because they can't afford the Internet, they've been very isolated as a result of not having access, even if they have the skills and know how to use computers and iPhones. Do you feel it should be a public utility?

[Connie Newman]

I think that might be a loaded question.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

It is a bit of a loaded question. I'm not going to lie.

[Connie Newman]

Personally, I believe it should. We're in the new age. We can't be doing things that we did 30 years ago and have policy and rules from 30 years ago. We need to get with the times, and the times and COVID showed us that Internet access is a utility.

Should it be common out there? Yes. Now, would some of my political friends of all stripes agree with me? Probably not. That's where the “loaded” comes in.

To my witness friend from Quebec, a lot of what he was saying is so very true in Manitoba too. People who had reasonable incomes through COVID may survive through it all, but those who did not.... Housing was an issue. Transportation is an issue. The day when I have to think twice about whether I'm paying for the pills that some doctor has prescribed for me, or paying for Internet and those kinds of things, there's a real problem. It's a societal problem, and it's a political problem. You can put me on a soapbox doing this.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Well, I'm going to keep you on your soapbox, because I agree with what you're saying.

One of the things I've been pushing for is a guaranteed livable basic income. We have income guarantees; for example, OAS is an income guarantee. I'm arguing that it's not livable, for the very reasons you're talking about. I'm pushing for a guaranteed livable basic income for all, including for seniors, in addition to current and future government programs and supports. For example, if the pharmacare bill that our party put forward passed, it would be in addition to having full coverage for medicine.

Do you think a guaranteed livable basic income would make a difference for seniors, lifting them out of poverty?

[Connie Newman]

It's not only seniors. When we look at the homelessness that's happening today because of COVID, and the number of older adults who are homeless because of COVID, guaranteed income of some sort should help to negate that.