Dear Constituents,

It has been a busy but productive start to 2004 for me. In February, the Government laid out its vision for next session of Parliament in the Speech from the Throne.

One of the first activities of a new session is for Members of Parliament to be assigned to the various Standing Committees and for those Committees to elect their Chair and Vice Chair in a free vote by all parties.

I am pleased to let you know that I was elected as the Chair of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Estimates and Vice Chair of the Standing Committee on the Environment and Sustainable Development. It is very gratifying to have earned the respect of one’s colleagues for your work.

The Government also tabled a Budget on March 23rd which formalized some of the commitments made in the Throne Speech and addressed other important priorities based on extensive consultations with Canadians, the Provinces and with leaders of our cities. Highlights of the key Budget initiatives are included in this report. I have also included extracts of my speech in the House of Commons on March 25th.

One of the main areas addressed in the Budget is the need to prepare for life- long learning and assistance for families to save for the cost of their children’s education. On March 27, 2004, I participated in a youth policy forum with Mayor McCallion. I have prepared a brief report in this householder on some of the issues raised by the youth. On the cover of this report, I am pictured with some of the students who participated.

On December 10, 2003, I announced a series of proposals relating to the health and well-being of our seniors. This was followed up by a Town Hall meeting I hosted on January 13th, tabling of 17 motions in the House of Commons on February 2nd and a follow-up Public Forum on Seniors on February 25th. I have included a more detailed report on my seniors’ initiatives in this issue.

You may be aware that Prime Minister Paul Martin has promoted a series of initiatives which would address what he characterized as the democratic deficit. These are intended to enhance the role of Members of Parliament. These include among other things, more free votes in Parliament, making all Private Members Bills votable and allowing Bills to be referred to Committee at an earlier stage in the legislative process so that there is greater latitude for MPs to amend Bills.

In preparation for the next Federal Election, all political parties are going through the process of nominating (electing) their candidates. Under this new environment of opening up democracy, MPs in my own Party are also now subject to be challenged by others and I support the process. In the past, people were discouraged from challenging sitting MPs for the nomination. However, I believe that if an MP is an under-achiever or simply is not a good Member of Parliament, there should be a mechanism to make a change.

I am pleased to let you know that I was successful in winning a contested nomination in Mississauga South and that I will be a candidate in the next election. However, I realize that I have to work even harder to keep in touch with my constituents to ensure that my work is reflective of your priorities and interests. At the same time, an MP has to provide high quality service in the constituency office. I am fortunate to have had the very able assistance of Mrs. Joan Phillips and Mrs. Irene Corridore in my office for the past nine years. Our combined experience of over 30 years makes a big difference.

I hope that you will continue to share your views on the issues of importance to you and to provide me with your constructive input on how I can do a better job on your behalf.

Sincerely,

Paul Szabo, MP

After months of consultation with Canadians, the Government tabled its first Budget of the new session of Parliament on March 23, 2004. "Today, I am presenting a focused budget plan with two clear objectives," Minister Goodale told the House of Commons. "First, to demonstrate unequivocally the principles of financial responsibility and integrity; and second, to begin to give tangible shape to the goals presented in the Speech from the Throne."

While making new investments in public health, learning, research and development, and a New Deal for our communities, Budget 2004 maintains Canada’s record of balanced budgets or better.
Among the key initiatives of the budget are:

• The seventh consecutive balanced budget is projected for 2003–04, the first time since Confederation. Balanced budgets or better are forecast for 2004–05 and 2005–06.
  
• Improving expenditure control and oversight by implementing a comprehensive plan, including the re-establishment of the Office of the Comptroller General of Canada.
  
• Confirming the payment of an additional $2 billion in health care funding for the provinces and territories in the 2003–04 fiscal year. As part of the Government’s commitment to provide stable, long-term health care funding, cash transfers to the provinces and territories for health and social programs will reach $28.1 billion in 2007–08, representing an average annual increase of $1.8 billion, of 8 per cent per year, starting from 2003-04.
  
• Establishing the Canada Public Health Agency to ensure that effective surveillance and crisis response systems are in place to better deal with major public health problems.
  
• Speeding up the implementation of the agreement with the provinces and territories to provide better access to affordable, quality early learning and child care programs.
  
• Providing a new Canada Learning Bond of up to $2,000 for every child, born after 2003, in a family that is entitled to the National Child Benefit (NCB) supplement. An initial $500 bond will be provided, with subsequent $100 annual installments for children, until age 15, in each year that the family is entitled to the NCB supplement.
  
• Boosting funding for Canada’s three federal granting councils to help foster knowledge and innovation, as well as $270 million to provide venture capital for start-up companies in key emerging sectors.
  
• Implementing the Government’s commitment to fully rebate the goods and services tax (GST) paid by municipalities, effective February 1, 2004. This will provide municipalities with $7 billion in GST relief over the next 10 years.
  
• Investing $4 billion over 10 years to clean up contaminated sites across Canada.
  
• Giving an income tax exemption to Canadian Forces personnel and police serving on high-risk international missions.
  
• The Minister also noted that the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development predicts Canada will be the only Group of Seven (G-7) nation to post a budget surplus in 2004 for the third consecutive year.
  
• The Government will maintain its Contingency Reserve at $3 billion and set aside an additional $1 billion in economic prudence in both 2004–05 and 2005–06.

From a fiscal perspective, Budget 2004 sets the objective of bringing Canada’s debt-to-GDP (gross domestic product) ratio down to 25 per cent within 10 years. Achieving this target will require the Government to continue to reallocate its resources and to manage expenditures in a way that reflects the priorities of Canadians. The Government has secured $1 billion of reallocation from existing spending in 2004–05 and beyond. As well, the Cabinet Committee on Expenditure Review is examining all programs to identify $3 billion annually in savings within four years for reinvestment in the priorities of Canadians and improving government management.

Further information can be obtained by visiting the Department of Finance Web site or by phoning 1 800 622-6232. Copies of the Budget documents are also available from my constituency office.

Last December 10th, I proposed an initiative to set Provincial and Regional poverty lines across Canada thereby establishing the level of poverty which we were prepared to tolerate in Canada. It was further proposed that the Government implement a program to provide a “Guaranteed Annual Income” for seniors and that mandatory retirement be eliminated throughout Canada. On January 13, 2004, I hosted a Town Hall Meeting on Seniors to seek public input on these and other proposals including:

• Increasing the Caregiver Tax Credit
  
• Provide Employment Insurance benefits for family caregivers
  
• Increase the Medical Expense Supplement
  
• Providing Canada Pension Plan Benefits for Caregivers
  
• Improve homecare, pharmacare and affordable housing
  
• Improving regulation of the nursing home industry
  
• Providing stiffer sentences for those convicted of elder abuse or of defrauding a senior
  
• Establishing the office of Physician General of Canada
  
• Establishing the cabinet position of Secretary of State For Seniors
  
• Develop public education campaign on “Ageism” (age discrimination)
  
• Develop and adopt a “Bill of Rights for Seniors”

These proposals were then formalized and Tabled in Parliament on February 2, 2004. This was followed up by another Public Forum which was held on February 25th. The feedback was excellent and I look forward to carrying on the consultations. Seniors’ issues involve all levels of Government and I am committed to fighting for seniors so that all can live in the dignity which they deserve.

The Prime Minister has recently established a Task Force on Seniors Health and Well-Being. I look forward to playing a role in their work and I will arrange for them to meet in Mississauga so that we can continue our dialogue on “How We Can Help Seniors”.

On March 25th, I had the opportunity to give a 20-minute speech in the House of Commons in regard to the Federal Budget. The following are a few extracts from that speech.

Mr. Paul Szabo (Mississauga South): Mr. Speaker, I have been a Member of Parliament for about 10 years and I have never seen one budget handle every matter that Canadians felt was a priority…

This is the seventh consecutive balanced budget, and Canadians would not find it acceptable to go back into a deficit scenario. That means choices have to be made. Every budget cannot continue to address every item. If everything is done modestly, then nothing is done well… This budget has four main themes: investing in our public health, learning, research and development and a new deal for our communities. There are a number of other areas, but I want to touch on a couple of these.

With regard to public health, members know about the additional $2 billion that will be given to the provinces. That was agreed upon with the provinces. It is another installment. We cannot look at the budget in isolation. We have to look at what has happened in health care over the series of budgets in which we have renewed the investment in our health care system. The increased investment in our health system has been enormous. It is about a 7% increase in each of the last two years.

Members may recall back in 1993 the National Forum on Health. Experts spent two years criss-crossing the country… and when the report came out, it indicated there was enough money in the system, but the problem was it was not being spent well. That was an interesting conclusion to reach because I heard the same thing from health officials at the very first health committee meeting I ever attended. They said that by spending 75% on fixing problems and only 25% toward preventing them, that model was unsustainable. They said that we needed to shift to healthy lifestyle choices and encourage people to live healthier lifestyles to alleviate the pressure on the health care system…
… Ever since I have been a Member of Parliament, health care has always been the number one priority. I think it always will be. It is probably one of the aspects of Canada that defines us…

I do not know what the figures are today, but back in the early nineties when I asked about them, I was told that about 75% of the health care costs in one's lifetime would be incurred in the last two years of their life. In a lot of cases that is when we are faced with life-threatening health conditions. It means the resource intensities go up. That means an individual needs more specialists, more specialized equipment, a more intense drug regime, et cetera. It means that if anyone were asked to pay for services when they received them, nobody could afford to get sick. That is why we have a health care system that is publicly funded, part of the five principles of the Canada Health Act. It means that we pay throughout our lives so the health care system will be there for us when we need it.

I think Canadians cherish that fact. I think they want us to continue to defend that and to ensure that those who need health care get it when they need it, not because they can afford it. They get it when they are sick. I believe health care will always be a part of the budgets of Canada. We should always continue to do what we can to improve the quality of the health care system and, indeed, the accessibility. However, there are problems within our health care system. Today we spend as much on drugs as we do on doctors and nurses. The pharmacare costs are enormous. I am not sure whether it is appropriate, but I think we should find out why…

Some provinces have caps on the amount a senior must contribute to the cost of their drug needs. For those listed drugs, people in my province of Ontario pay the lowest costs in Canada. However, if the drugs people need are not on the list, that is they are not insured or are only partially covered, the costs are lower in other provinces.

I am not sure whether the portability and the comprehensiveness that we boast about in the Canada Health Act are being reflected. For instance, I know in the city of Toronto, a senior who makes below a certain level of income can get dental care and vision care provided through the social services costs for seniors. In my own region of Peel, right next door, there is no such benefit. Why can people who live in Toronto get dental costs covered as a low-income senior, but if they live in Peel they cannot? …

We have some work to do. We know that the provinces deliver the services and the federal government's responsibilities are to protect the Canada Health Act and indeed to police it. As far as the taxpayers go, there is only one source of money. It is taxpayer money and they do not really care which jurisdiction is delivering the service. They care that every level of government is doing what they can to ensure that our health care system is responsive, equitable, portable, comprehensive, publicly funded, all the good things that we have in the Canada Health Act.

I wanted to raise that because we need to do more work in terms of the quality of our health care system. We need to know if we are moving in the right direction. A dollar spent on prevention is more productive in terms of better health outcomes of Canadians than a dollar spent on remediation or curing problems.

The model of health care has to change… For most people primary health care includes illness prevention, wellness programs, self-responsibility for our health and the very expensive acute health care services provided in our hospitals and in long-term care facilities… We need a fully integrated system that provides us with what we need, when we need it and where we need it at the most appropriate cost….

Hospitals are places where people go when they are sick. However, if we are going to get a better value for our health care dollar, we must have a better balance between illness focus and wellness focus. As an example, 97% of seniors live in their own homes. We have $28 billion in our health care system in Ontario, but only 1% goes to community services. That 1% of the budget is actually dedicated to the 97% of seniors who live in their own homes. Some 95% of the money goes to hospitals, physicians and pharmacare.

We need to rethink the primary health care model. We need to spend more resources on wellness and illness prevention…

Let me share with the House the situation of affordable housing in my region of Peel in the city of Mississauga. Affordable housing is in short supply, particularly for seniors. Half of our affordable housing is for seniors and half are family homes. The waiting lists for those seniors capable of living in their own unit are very long. According to the region of Peel, and February 25 was when I held the forum, the waiting list for affordable housing is seven to eight years. That is compared to two years in 1995-96. There has been almost no non-profit housing built in Peel since 1996. This is a problem. The dignity of having a roof over one's head, to be able to afford to have a dignified place to live is extremely important…

I want to share with the House a couple of thoughts I have with regard to how we might address seniors' issues. I believe seniors are the most vulnerable in our society. They are also the ones in our society who have very few tools to correct their situations…

First, I propose that Canada develop and implement a guaranteed annual income (GAI) for seniors. I really do not care how a senior got there but there must be a level of income below which a senior cannot live in dignity. That means we would have to establish poverty lines.... If we were to do that, that would be the benchmark against which we would be able to deal with matters, such as welfare, social assistance and other supplements to those in need. In fact, what we would be doing is establishing the level of poverty that we are prepared to tolerate.

I also propose that we eliminate mandatory retirement at age 65. It is still part of collective agreements in a number of provinces. Can anyone imagine someone at age 65, who is vibrant, in good health, doing a great job and with a great set of skills, being told that now that he or she is 65 years of age that he or she has to go? It is wrong.

As a matter of fact, the age 65, in terms of retirement, came up I believe at the time of Bismarck and Hitler when they referred to people who turned age 65 as the “unnecessary eaters”. It is a little different now. I think that mandatory retirement is way past its time and we have to do what we can to eliminate it throughout Canada.

Caregivers, those who provide care to seniors, are a growing group. In the Income Tax Act we have, and I am pleased that I had something to do with it, a caregiver tax credit. It is for those who provide care in the home to an infirmed or disabled family member. I think that credit has to be increased. It is only worth about $500.

When people have to withdraw from the paid labour force to take care of their loved ones, an infirmed senior or someone who needs help because they cannot get enough home care assistance, they lose not only a net paycheque but they also lose years of employment in which they could be building up their own pension credits to provide for their own retirement. Caregivers are making a tremendous sacrifice and I think we should do more for them. We should provide employment insurance benefits for those who withdraw from the paid labour force to provide care. Why should they not qualify? It is unpaid work but it is important work.

I think the medical expense supplement should be increased. From time to time, and I have some examples which I will not go into now, seniors face significant spikes in their health care or pharmacare costs. Some things are not covered and we do not provide the relief they need for the extra expenses…

I also think we need continuity in our Canada pension plan benefit for caregivers who leave the paid labour force. Why should they lose years of employment income credit to build up their own Canada pension plan? It does not make any sense.

How about improving home care? There is a gap in home care right now. People can get two to four hours of home care but what happens to the people who do not need constant supervision but who may get themselves into trouble just being alone for half an hour? If a person needs more than four hours of home care a day, someone will have to leave a job and take care of the person or the person may have to go to a nursing home which can cost anywhere from $2,000 to $2,500 a month. It is sometimes not affordable or even accessible.

The nursing home industry should be fully regulated, including the small private ones. We have had far too many cases of senior abuse and we need to address that. There should be industry standards for our nursing homes.

We also need to deal with those who are convicted of either elder abuse or defrauding of seniors. Seniors are vulnerable. People who are so low that they would take advantage of a senior deserve stiffer sentences. I would support that because it is an exacerbating factor.

We need to establish the office of the physician general of Canada. Health Canada has a lot of files open and a lot of battles going on with different interest groups. Would it not be lovely to have a physician general of Canada who would, among other things, address the health issues and needs of seniors to ensure they get the guidance they need?

How about establishing a cabinet position entitled secretary of state for seniors so that when we look at seniors' issues there would be someone at the table fighting for them?

How about a public education campaign on ageism? Ageism is racism on the basis of age. It is really endemic in our institutions. One example I have concerns a doctor in New Brunswick who has refused to take new patients over 60 years of age. This is ageism. They paid for it so why is it not available to them?

Another proposal that I recommended is that we adopt a seniors’ bill of rights. I am not suggesting that this should override the charter, or anything like that, but I believe we should establish a value system for seniors, one we would be prepared to use as a lens to look at all the things we do to see how it affects seniors and to ensure the rights of seniors are being protected…

I want Canadians to know that I and many other people in this place care about seniors and we will work to make sure that some of these seniors' priorities will appear in the next budget.

(End of Speech)

On March 27th, I was pleased to be a guest speaker, along with Mayor Hazel McCallion, at a Youth Policy Forum. I was very impressed with their initiative which was intended to inform youth about making public policy and the process that is used. They also addressed some current issues with the Mayor and myself.

The Mayor spent some time fielding questions about public transit. The youth presented their case citing growing urban populations, rising fuel costs, environmental impacts such as greenhouse gas emissions and funding shortages for transit. They called for an integrated transportation network within the GTA. Presently there are 15 local transit providers in the GTA without any co-coordinating body. They pointed out that the TTC has an $800 million capital shortfall per year and require a further $500 million of capital for needed expansion.

The participants also made their case on matters related to government accountability including ideas such as:

• Changing our electoral system to proportional representation. This means that the number of seats that a party would have in Parliament would be determined by the percentage of the total vote that party received.
  
• They proposed that there should be a mechanism to remove a Prime Minister from office other than at election time and that there should be a reduction in the number of appointments the PM was allowed to make.
  
• The wanted fixed terms for the House of Commons, more free votes for MPs and an elected Senate.
  
• They wanted more ways for citizens to become involved in policymaking including citizen-initiated legislation.

Financing of their education was also a hot topic. Many argued that tuition was too high and student debt continued to be a problem for many graduates. The discussion was very constructive and I was delighted to have the opportunity to hear their views and concerns. I have agreed to meet with them again to look at some possible policy options which I could present to the Government.

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.