Fall 2001

Dear Constituents,

I hope you had a safe and enjoyable summer. It gave me an opportunity to work on a broad range of projects and I wanted to update you on some of the issues on which I have been working.

As you know, I have been chairing a tax group for Finance Minister Paul Martin who appears with me on the front cover. Our group has been working on a broad range of budget-related issues which will be discussed with the Minister by October.

One interesting proposal we have considered is the opportunity to earn Canada Pension Plan benefits by those who forego working in the paid workforce to provide care in their home to a preschool child or a disabled or ill or aged family member. Such persons would get credit for the time spent providing unpaid work and have the option of paying the premiums for that time when they returned to the paid workforce. This would be similar to the past service provisions offered in many other pension plans.

In this householder, you will find articles on illicit drugs, access to information, breast-feeding, reproductive technologies, the aging of our society and some other features and information which I hope you will find of interest.

My largest project was consulting with constituents on meeting the challenges of an aging society. A limited survey was used and if you did not receive one, I have provided the questions in this householder. Your input would be appreciated should you wish to participate and, as always, your views on any other matters of importance to you are also most welcome.

Sincerely,

Paul Szabo

In 1983, The Access to Information Act was passed by Parliament to make government more open, transparent and accountable to the Canadian Public. For a five-dollar fee plus the cost of photocopying, Canadians have made substantial use of the Act. Replies must be made within 30 days but where the work required to assemble the information is very extensive, the respondent can request more time. The nature of requests has also become more specific to the point that privacy rights are coming into conflict with the right to know. For example, a request was made for the appointments book of the Prime Minister which would show who he was with, where and at what time. No doubt it would be interesting reading, but is that kind of information private or does it fulfil what the legislation contemplated 18 years ago?

Last year, I wrote a letter to the Minister of Justice to provide my views on the taxation implications of a Justice Bill that was before Parliament. Months later, I received notice from the Ministry of Justice that my letter was going to be released as part of a response to an access to information request. The request actually asked for copies of all correspondence received or issued by the Justice Department related to that Bill. While I do not have a problem with my letter being released, I have to wonder whether blanket requests for any and all documents related to any matter is helpful for a specific purpose or is it abusing the intent of the Act.

Canadians have the right to know how the country is being run and how their money is being spent. There is a consensus that the Act needs to be updated and a special government review is already in progress. I am also a member of an all-party committee of MPs who are holding hearings on the Act. Any proposed changes to the Act would have to be passed by Parliament. As the process unfolds, I will report on the issues and some of the proposals.

The aging of Canadian society will have a significant impact on our policies, plans and priorities. The following are population projections from Statistics Canada which highlight these dramatic changes:

Canadian Population Projections (thousands)

The number of Canadians over 55 years will increase by 72.2% over the next 20 years and their proportion of the population will increase from 22.1% to 33.3%. The fertility rate has dropped from 2.1 births per woman in 1970 to a current rate of 1.6. The life expectancy of males has increased from 70.5 years in 1976 to 75.6 in 1996. For women, the increase was from 77.8 years to 81.4. With an aging population, greater spending will be required on pensions and health care while at the same time, taxes paid will reduce as new retirees replace employment income with pension income. In 20 years, our population is also expected to begin to decline which will further slow economic growth.

Maintaining our health care system is the number one priority for Canadians but as society ages the demands and costs will increase. For example, the Canadian Cancer Society reports that the incidence of cancer is already increasing. This year, an estimated 134,100 Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer. They predict that new cases of cancer will increase by another 70% by the year 2001 which could have serious repercussions for the health system.
Planning for tomorrow is an ongoing process. That is why changes were made to ensure that the Canada Pension Plan was on a stable footing to meet our future needs. We will, however, continue to reassess our priorities and our program spending. As part of this process, I conducted a limited survey this summer to obtain input on a few related issues.

If you did not receive a survey but would like to provide your views, I invite you to add your input on the following questions which were included in the survey:

1. Since we live much longer, should consideration be given to increasing the retirement age gradually over many years? For example: increase the retirement age to 67 by one month per year for 24 years.
2. As demands on healthcare increase, should consideration be given to user fees for certain health care services or to allowing the ability to pay for services from private healthcare providers?
3. Should consideration be given to increasing immigration levels or to encouraging families to have more children as a way to address the projected decline in our population base and in our economic growth?
4. Should cuts be made to other programs and services to offset the increased costs of an aging society? Which ones?
5. Do you feel that we should pay down more of our debt each year so we do not unduly burden future generations?
6. Are there other priorities which you feel are as important as addressing the consequences of aging? (eg the environment, poverty, taxation, seniors benefits, defence, agriculture, aboriginal affairs, the economy, education etc) Which ones?

Thank you for your assistance and I will be reporting on the input received in future householders.

Pollara Research Group recently conducted a national survey on how concerned Canadians were about certain issues. Each was asked to indicate if they were "Very Concerned", "Moderately Concerned" or "Not Very Concerned". The following are the issues in order of which ones had the highest level of "Very Concerned":

The survey confirms yet again that health is the top priority of Canadians and that is one of the reasons why the government established a Royal Commission headed by former Provincial Premier, Roy Romano. The Commission is consulting widely across Canada and their report will provide important input on how to meet the needs of all Canadians.

The other gratifying response was Canadian Unity at only 22%. We can never be complacent about the threat of separation after the experience of the last Referendum. As such, we need to continue to show that all Canadians are better off within a united Canada.

For your general information, the following is summary of the expenditures made by the Government of Canada for the year ended March 31, 2000. The figures are in millions of dollars and the percentages shown represent the percent of total expenditures:

By far, the most communications I received this summer was on the subject of cloning and stem cell research. Recently, President Bush announced that the US would permit limited use of embryos which were no longer viable (i.e. no life and death decision).

Canada is also in the process of addressing this and other issues related to reproductive technologies. On May 3rd, the Health Minister presented draft legislation to the Health committee that would ban human cloning and other unacceptable practices, regulate assisted reproduction and address research in this area. The Committee has been asked to provide a report to the Minister by the end of January 2002.

The draft legislation has two primary objectives. First, the Government of Canada wants to ensure that Canadians using assisted human reproduction techniques can do so without compromising their health or safety. Second, the Government aims to ensure that promising research related to assisted human reproduction takes place within a regulated environment.

In addition to banning cloning, the proposed legislation would prohibit the following activities:

• Germ-line genetic alteration
  
• Development of an embryo outside a woman's body beyond the accepted 14 day limit
  
• Creation of embryos solely for research purposes
  
• Creating an embryo from another embryo or foetus
  
• Transplanting of reproductive materials from animals into humans
  
• Use of human reproductive material previously transplanted into an animal
  
• Gender preference - increasing the probability of one sex
  
• Sale and purchase of human embryos
  
• Purchase, barter or exchange of human sperm or eggs
  
• Commercial surrogacy arrangements

With regard to the regulations, one of the main purposes is to protect the health of Canadians - particularly of women and of children who are born through assisted human reproductive procedures. In particular, the regulations would specify how human sperm, eggs or embryos are to be handled and stored. By limiting the number of embryos that could be transplanted into a woman during in-vitro fertilization, the regulations would reduce the incidence of high-risk multiple births and / or low birth weight babies. The regulations would also focus on information needs, informed consent, counselling requirements, safety of laboratories and ethical conduct of reproductive sciences.

The most challenging issue is the question of harvesting stem cells from human embryos. This represents a very serious ethical and moral question which is receiving substantial attention from all sides of the argument. Stem cells can be manipulated into replicating many body tissues and be used in advancing research in treating spinal cord injuries or in treating diseases like Alzheimer's, Parkinson's or cancer. It sounds good but the potential of stem cells remains entirely speculative because such cells have never been used successfully in clinical applications. Stem cells also present the possibility of tissue rejection (which would require drug therapy for life) and tumour growth. Further complicating the discussion was the recent research announcement that stem cells can also be harvested from adult skin. Although there is some question of superiority of embryonic stem cells, the life decision referred to by President Bush would not be an issue.

I know that this legislation and particularly the stem cell issue are very important to many constituents and I will be following it closely. More information is available through my office.

Promoting the healthy outcomes of children has been a substantial part of my work as a Member of Parliament. Avoiding alcohol during pregnancy is the best way to eliminate the risk of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. In addition, the first year of life very significantly affects the life-long health of the child. Breast- feeding also provides important benefits.

In the past, I have written articles and made statements in the House of Commons about the benefits of breast-feeding. Recently, Health Canada issued a pronouncement that breast-feeding was recommended for one year. The physical and emotional advantages are substantial ranging from resisting ear infections and colds, allergies, digestive problems and too rapid weight gain to gaining greater contentment.

Now there is more evidence. In a study published in the August 2001 British Medical Journal concludes that babies who were breast-fed less than 3 months were more likely to score below average for mental skills at 13 months and total intelligence at 5 years of age than babies who were breast-fed for 6 months or more. They found a positive association between the duration of breast-feeding and mental development even after adjusting for maternal age, maternal education, maternal intelligence and smoking at the time of conception.

Credible information is very important to guide us with our health-related decisions. That is why I have proposed to the Government, the creation of the position of Physician General of Canada who would make pronouncements and disseminate health information on the WEB and through published material. As an independent and credible health professional, Canadians could look to the Physician General for guidance on health issues of importance.

Every now and then, newspapers publish the results of a quiz on Canadian history and usually conclude that we do not know our roots very well. During the summer, I read a book on Canadian history to brush up on our past so that I could better understand the present. It was time well spent. Since most of the quizzes ask something about our Prime Ministers, I thought you might be interested to have a list:

1. Sir John A. Macdonald 1867-73; 1878-91
   
2. Alexander Mackenzie 1873-78
   
3. Sir John Abbott 1891-92
   
4. Sir John Thompson 1892-94
   
5. Sir Mackenzie Bowell 1894-96
   
6. Sir Charles Tupper 1896
   
7. Sir Wilfrid Laurier 1896-1911
   
8. Sir Robert Borden 1911-20
   
9. Arthur Meighen 1920-21; 1926
   
10. Mackenzie King 1921-26; 26-30; 35-48
    
11. R. B. Bennett 1930-35
    
12. Louis St. Laurent 1948-57
    
13. John Diefenbaker 1957-63
    
14. Lester Pearson 1963-68
    
15. Pierre Trudeau 1968-79; 1980-84
    
16. Joe Clark 1979-1980
    
17. John Turner 1984
    
18. Brian Mulroney 1984-93
    
19. Kim Campbell 1993
    
20. Jean Chretien 1993-present

We cannot go forward if we have no sense of where we came from and I hope you too will find the time to learn more about our great country through its exciting history.

As a result of a motion which passed in the House of Commons, an all-party Committee has been formed to examine our laws and programs related to the use of illicit drugs in Canada. This decision was prompted by the serious increase of deaths in the streets of Vancouver due to drug overdose or the taking of bad drugs. This problem also includes the issue of sharing needles and transmitting diseases such as HIV AIDS.

At the same time, Health Canada has approved the medical use of marijuana for those who suffer adversities related to cancer, AIDS and other life-threatening illnesses. The media have taken the opportunity to link these issues and have often referred to the review by Parliament as a vehicle to legalize all marijuana use. This is simply not the case. As the former Chair of the Committee reviewing Bill C-7 on Controlled Drugs and Substances, I am acutely aware of the drug problems in Canada. I am also aware that there are strong opinions by some influential groups that we should change our laws.

Some have argued that drug use should be decriminalized which means that there would be no criminal prosecution or criminal record. One of the reasons for this position is that those with a drug conviction cannot get into the US or other countries because of their record. Some police agencies have actively supported decriminalization arguing that the courts are clogged-up by the large number of cases. Others have also argued that there is no victim if someone uses drugs. Still, others argue the Harm-Reduction view which says drug use cannot be stopped so we should concentrate on providing treatment rather than making them criminals. There are a number of other arguments which really push some hot buttons. Drug addictions are serious matters and people need help, but we cannot ignore the other consequences.
Drug users need a source of drugs and now we are in a whole other issue related to drug pushing. Drugs are also a very expensive habit usually beyond the means of the user leading to other criminal actions. Some will also ignore the fact that drug users have high absentee rates from work and tend to have more health problems than non-drug users. Those who suggest that there are no victims in drug use really should consider the enormous costs to business and our health system.

In August, the Globe and Mail ran a series of editorials on illicit drugs. In their final editorial, they asked the question whether easing access to drugs could be justified. They suggest that the answer can be found at any high school where drugs are readily accessible and we just cannot stop the drug trade from feeding our children. The Globe and Mail solution is damage control or harm reduction. They note that the more a person is exposed to crime, arrest and imprisonment, the worse their long-term prospects become. They suggest that decriminalizing simple drug use would reduce that exposure significantly. In their view, such action would lead, over the next 10 years, to better results than we see around us now. I personally have some concerns with simply giving up and decriminalizing drug use. How many more people would start to use drugs if they were decriminalized? If there were more users, wouldn't the price go up thereby giving more money to the pushers? Wouldn't crime and health care demands increase?

The House of Commons review will take several months and will lead to a report to the Minister for his consideration. Any changes to any legislation would require a Bill to Parliament which would get full Parliamentary review and public consultation. The report will be tabled in the House of Commons and will be available to the public. Personally, I will put a copy on my WEB site (www.paulszabo.com) and copies will be available in my office. You will also be able to read the testimony on my site. I intend to follow this process very closely and I will report on developments.

OTTAWA OFFICE MISSISSAUGA OFFICE

Room 175 1684 Lakeshore Road West

Confederation Building Unit 20

House of Commons Mississauga, Ontario

Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6 L5J 1J5

Telephone: 613-992-4848 905-822-2111

Fax: 613-996-3267 905-822-2115

Email: szabop@parl.gc.ca szabop1@parl.gc.ca

Visit us on the Internet: www.paulszabo.com

Special personal messages of congratulations may be requested for those Birthdays and Anniversaries listed below. As these events are very important occasions, you may want to request a message, when applicable, from Her Majesty The Queen, the Governor General and the Prime Minister of Canada.

Greetings from Her Majesty the Queen are available for 100th Birthdays and every 5th year thereafter, and 60th Wedding Anniversaries and every 5th year thereafter. Please note that copies of birth certificates and marriage certificates are required by Government House for messages from The Queen.

Birthdays

75th and over - message from the Prime Minister

90th - 99th - message from the Governor General

100th and over - message from Her Majesty The Queen (copy of birth certificate required)

Wedding Anniversaries

25th and over - message from the Prime Minister

50th - 59th - message from the Governor General

60th and over - message from Her Majesty The Queen (copy of marriage certificate required)

Please complete this form to inform us of the occasion and return it postage free to my Constituency Office.

Visit us on the Internet: www.paulszabo.com

Mississauga Office Hours: Monday to Friday 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. Appointments can be scheduled during office hours or other arrangements can be made by calling the office.

Constituents may write to any Member of Parliament or Cabinet Minister postage free. Simply address your envelope to the particular Member, c/o House of Commons, Ottawa, Ontario K1A 0A6. Your views and suggestions are important.