Justice Committee on May 6th, 2021

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'd like to reiterate what you just said, Madam Chair. At the beginning of her testimony, Ms. Beaulieu referred to a document she had sent. I understood that the clerk was going to send it to us. I just want confirmation from Ms. Beaulieu , and from you, Madam Chair, that we'll be able to receive this document, because the extremely important subject we are discussing today involves some complex issues.

I'll now turn to Mr. Webb.

Mr. Webb, I must admit to you that my colleague Mr. Maloney asked nearly all of the questions I was getting ready to ask in my second round. I would just like confirmation on a few points.

I understand from your testimony that elder abuse is a sufficiently complex question deserving of a special section in the Criminal Code that could, for example, define abuse and the many different forms it can take, and establish a number of specific rules on elder abuse.

Is that what you told us, Mr. Webb, or have I misunderstood?

[Graham Webb]

No. I'm sorry, Monsieur Fortin, but that's not my testimony. I'm speaking specifically to an offence that should be created for neglect and abuse in care facilities. It would apply to persons of all ages. I'm not speaking of a specific elder abuse provision; I'm speaking about an abuse-and-neglect provision.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

In that case, don't you think that the same logic should apply to all cases of seniors who are abused, and not just those who are in care facilities?

After hearing Ms. Beaulieu's testimony, I have the impression that there are cases of abuse everywhere. Seniors living with their family can also be abused. In care facilities, on the street, in financial institutions, in short, just about everywhere in society, seniors can be subjected to forms of abuse that are specific to them, and that differ from what other people are likely to encounter.

Wouldn't the same logic be applicable to all seniors, Mr. Webb?

[Graham Webb]

I agree, entirely, Mr. Fortin, with that comment. Yes, it does. There are many different types of situations of elder abuse, and each deserves a systemic response.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you.

[Rhéal Fortin, Bloc, Rivière-du-Nord, QC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Mr. Garrison, please go ahead for two and a half minutes.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. As we draw to a close here, I too want to thank both our witnesses today for their long advocacy on behalf of seniors.

My final question for Madame Beaulieu will deal with another systemic issue, which is access to long-term care, which I've been focused on today. I know that's not necessarily her sole focus, but we seem to have a situation in this country such that those who need long-term care, both the individuals and their families, have differential access. Quite often racialized communities, indigenous communities and the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender communities have difficulty finding access to long-term care that is culturally appropriate and supportive.

In your work, Madame Beaulieu, have you found this to be the case, that there is really differential access to necessary long-term care depending on who you are in Canada?

[Marie Beaulieu]

Thank you, Mr. Garrison.

That leads me to two complementary subjects, access to long-term care, and recognition for elderly members of minority groups.

As you know, seniors are not a homogeneous group. There are huge differences based on gender, age and ethnocultural communities. Elderly people aged 65 to 100 can certainly be broken down into different age groups. And there are also First Nations seniors, LGBTQ seniors, and so on.

For example, research into LGBTQ seniors has shown that many who have lived their lives completely free of prejudice for a number of years, by which I mean they have openly affirmed that they are members of these communities, begin to hide their sexual or gender identity when they move into a long-term care facility because they are afraid of being discriminated against.

As for access to long-term care, we know that it's extremely limited. Eligibility is based on assessment by health and social services workers. We know that there are long waiting lists. This means that there is a lot of work to be done in terms of reviewing our eligibility criteria. Private facilities have grown as rapidly as they have for a reason. One of these reasons is that the public sector can't deal with current demand.

I'd like to continue, but I'll stop there. You have certainly raised two fascinating subjects.

[Randall Garrison, NDP, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you very much.

I'd love to pursue those further today, but I see that we're out of time. Thanks once again.

[The Chair, Liberal, Iqra Khalid]

Thank you very much, Mr. Garrison.

I'll take the opportunity now, on behalf of all committee members, to thank our witnesses who have come here today with their very compelling testimony.

We really appreciate your contributions. We'll say goodbye to you. You're welcome to leave at this time, if you like.

Very quickly to committee members, I want to give a response to Mr. Garrison's earlier inquiry about invitations to ministers.

I looked into the precedent, and also into the witness lists and the notes from the subcommittee. In our subcommittee meetings, we only discussed the presence of and invitations to officials, and not to ministers specifically, for this study. When the witness list was circulated to members, the ministers were also not included, by any party, on the compiled witness list.

I checked precedents as to how we have operated in the past, and I realized that it's only with government legislation where we have the minister. We invite the minister to that first meeting when we have government legislation before us. I also looked to see what our procedure was with our last study, the coercive conduct study, and I noticed that we didn't invite ministers, we only had the department officials.

That's kind of the framework within which we are entering this study. To address the question as to why ministers were not invited, it's because they were not on any of the witness lists from any members. I just thought I would give you that update.

If there are any questions or concerns at this time, please raise your hand.

Not seeing any, in that case, we will now adjourn the meeting.