In Conversation with the Honourable Monique Vezina

By Patrick Watson

Disability increases with age. In Canada, 7% of children under 15 experience some level of disability, compared to 14% of adults aged 35 to 54 and to 46.3% of those aged 65 and over. Seniors, therefore, are our largest and most rapidly increasing group of people with disabilities. It is currently estimated that there are 1,448,875 seniors with disabilities living in Canada.

Patrick Watson, Chairman of the ABILITIES Foundation, recently interviewed the Honourable Monique Vezina, Minister of State Responsible for Seniors. Watson began the interview by asking whether the current atmosphere of fiscal restraint, with some economists arguing that we spend too much on "social safety nets", raises problems for the government’s intentions regarding seniors with disabilities.

MV - The answer to your question is yes. The government does wish to help seniors and people with disabilities.

I believe you interviewed Robert de Cotret, the Minister Responsible for Persons with Disabilities. He surely pointed out to you the initiatives we have made available to people with disabilities. Other measures show this commitment; for example, when I was Minister of Transport I amended legislation, ensuring that persons with disabilities have access to any form of transport that was not covered by legislation in 1986.

As for seniors, it is the first time the federal government has had a minister responsible for their concerns. This clearly demonstrates a political will to implement mechanisms to prepare Canadian society for our aging population. It also demonstrates that the federal government has understood that aging is not a problem to be resolved, but a natural phenomenon which must be envisaged as a society, as a community. In the past five years, we have established numerous programmes enabling seniors to define means and to set priorities allowing seniors’ groups and provincial and federal governments to work together. I have just come from a programme which was set up by seniors’ groups: an information guide that was developed as a joint venture -- clear evidence of the government’s will to empower seniors. I call it "power by and for seniors".

Increasingly, we need people 55 or over on our television screens, in our commercials, in our municipal governments, to define the new needs of society. This is a society in which one-fifth of its population soon will be persons aged 65 or over. Having said this, there are also a whole range of social-security programmes which are already in place and have earned respect. With the margin of manoeuvrability which has been acquired, we have been able to improve programmes for female spouses and those in the 60-64 age group.

There is still much to be done. However, I can say that, yes, the government has a political will to recognize what I call "grey power".

PW - Do seniors here in Canada represent an asset or a burden? How can we differentiate between the two? How can the concept that seniors are a positive force be justified?

MV - My answer is that seniors are an asset. Seniors are a social force because people of retirement age have much more leisure time, many more hours available to the community, the parish, the municipality -- so they are a social force.

They also represent an economic force. There is much said about seniors in financial difficulties. However, a large percentage of seniors have means; their houses are paid for, their daily expenses are different from when they were raising families. They are an economic force, an asset; our seniors represent a wealth for our country.

Seniors are making available to Canadian society their wisdom, experience, expertise and knowledge; often they have retired from a job but not from everyday activities. Therefore, they represent a strength, one which we absolutely must call on in the situations we are experiencing at present.

Just recently, I met a gentleman who said, "I’m the new director of a seniors’ centre. They approached me after retirement to take the job." I said to myself, bravo! That’s at least a start at acknowledging the wisdom and experience of some seniors.

According to demographics, the population is aging and increasing numbers are reaching retirement age. We have the strength of numbers. This group can impose its will just as the women’s movement has in the past 25 years. I often draw parallels between the feminist movement and women’s collectives when they were demanding a place at the boardroom table so women’s ideas could be addressed along with men’s. I think that we need to include people who have retired from an occupation but are still active in society.

So to my mind, seniors do represent more of an asset than a burden. Having said this, there will always be a percentage of seniors who need municipal, provincial and federal support. This place we are in provides meals on wheels for seniors. Likewise we need a special network to help those who are experiencing financial difficulties. These are often women, people who are alone and poor. Government -- and society -- has a responsibility for them. I do not consider this a burden. I do consider this percentage of the population to represent a social reality, a reality for which responses must be found. To my mind, the solution is to develop solidarity.

If we speak of seniors’ independence, if we speak of quality of life, we must at the same time speak of social networks to replace family networks. Over time, the family has changed. We have to think of a social network that reflects the needs of the collective group. For instance, here in Rosedale, a district of Toronto which I had imagined wealthier than it seems, we see a collective desire by seniors in good health to assist those in need. What we must develop, and what we are developing through our programmes and government initiatives, is a way to break through the isolation of those who are retired. We must develop solidarities to keep them independent and out of institutions for as long as possible. 20 years ago, you would find seniors entering institutions at a much younger age than thewy do today.

PW - Let’s talk a bit more about the government of Canada’s initiatives. Have there been any surveys to find out what seniors really think? Has the government invested large sums in an effort to discern exactly what is happening with seniors throughout the country?

MV - There is the standard census which is carried out every four years. I remember the 1986 Census -- when I was Minister of Supply and Services responsible for Statistics Canada. We were surprised to learn that, of the number of persons aged 65 or over who were in the census, 92 per cent were living independent lives and only eight per cent were in traditional institutions.

PW - You were surprised? What did you think the figure would be?

MV - One would have thought it would be 35 per cent or maybe fifty-fifty. We had put our finger on a statistic that told us our perception of Canada’s seniors is far different from reality.

We have also done several studies since that census...at Health and Welfare and Statistics Canada, for instance. A recent study on aging and independence aims at verifying the way people prepare for upcoming retirement. That study was carried out on people aged 45 or older. We discovered that a high percentage are not very concerned about planning their retirement. In the same study, there was a point concerning the level of satisfaction among people aged 45 and over regarding their financial security and their perception of retirement. A high percentage of those interviewed were satisfied with their state of health.

Everything indicates that turning 60 is not a handicap. We need to set up a preventive programme to do away with "ageism", as we have with sexism. We are trying to eliminate the mental block about turning 60. There are numerous studies which demonstrate the social reality, and it is important that they be carried out.

There are also studies on demographics. Statistics lead us to believe that by the year 2020, one Canadian in five will be aged 65 or over. Longevity is increasing, so we will be living to 80 or 90 -- we might even reach the end of our genetic roll, which would be 120 years old.

PW - It has been said that people can live long lives, but nobody wants to get old.

MV - This is completely accurate. I remember in Victoria, two years ago, I asked to visit some seniors’ centres. Nobody knew I was a minister. A young man greeted me at one, saying, "Here, a person’s age is not what counts; people are classified according to their health status." That, when it comes down to it, is the basic premise for independence. We have to think of health, of a decent quality of life. Our New Horizons Seniors’ Independence Programmes are designed to provide information on good health and physical fitness.

We are, as a society, getting involved in changing models, traditions, attitudes, behaviour -- but we still have a long way to go. I heard someone recently describe seniors as "fragile and fearful". But the seniors I meet as I travel throughout Canada are active, smiling, strong, dynamic. I would say that 70 per cent of those aged 65 and over whom I have met are like that. This is why we have to change models.

The financial aspect is probably a contributing factor to this independence. For that 70 per cent of the population whom I described as dynamic, strong, etc., being independent is linked to a certain financial security. We must, therefore, look after that part of the population which needs social services, housing, transportation.

PW - There are more and more people who are both seniors and have disabilities.

MV - This is where my responsibilities and those of Robert de Cotret overlap. When a person’s independence is diminished, there are services which must be provided.

PW - An example?

MV - I’m thinking of transportation. There is public transportation which is not accessible. If we are talking about individual independence, then there are surely ways of putting specialized transportation at the service of seniors. This is where the Ministry Responsible for Persons with Disabilities and the Ministry Responsible for Seniors come to a meeting point. There are public access services that seniors could use to enable them to be more independent, but that perhaps they don’t take advantage of. But because we already have a policy that favours people with disabilities, because we have programmes to enable them to have access to buildings, this means that those seniors who are less independent than they used to be may also take advantage -- and so much the better -- of building ramp[s, special hotel rooms with safety features, etc.

PW - Your department co-sponsored a forum in Vancouver, "Together Today for Tomorrow". Do you see the development of a sort of coalition among seniors and people with disabilities? Does the collaboration between your two departments represent more or less the potential of such a coalition?

MV - I have always shied away from the word "coalition" because of the idea of one party taking over the other -- a kind of assimilation and integration. My mandate is to change society’s perception of aging by presenting and promoting an image that is positive, active and in motion. I would have difficulty being part of a coalition which at the same time promotes people with disabilities. This would seem somewhat paradoxical, since I see only one per cent of the clientele I represent needing the access or facilities that people with disabilities require. I would prefer to speak of an association. We could retain the philosophy of a national strategy on aging.

My concern is that society comes around to accepting thew aging of our population by treating it as a problem to resolve: putting a ramp here, a health programme there, a fitness programme, a better pension income. I could easily associate services with the Minister Responsible for Persons with Disabilities, with Central Mortgage and Housing, with Transport Canada, to ensure that we have an integrated society. But it is my hope, and has been for a very long time, that one day we will have no more ministers responsible for seniors. There will no longer be a distinction. I have also wished for a very long time that there were no ministers responsible for the status of women. The day women become full-fledged citizens, with access to education, work, training and upgrading, access to power, is the day such a distinction will no longer be needed. There will always be a segment of the population which will need this service, but not the majority. I look forward to the day society acknowledges that aging is a natural state, that our older Canadians are a resource with talents and abilities that need to be used. Consortiums can be struck between the young and old.

PW - Can you tell me with certainty that seniors want to see the distinction done away with?

MV - In 1992, no, but maybe by 2020.

PW - Not yet?

MV - Not yet, no, because they are aware of the need for a kind of special recognition, from government and from society in general.

I feel that programmes and initiatives are needed at the moment, in order to reshape the image of seniors and aging. We have made remarkable progress since the birth of Golden Age clubs for seniors some 20 years ago, with the startup of the New Horizons Programme. These programmes and groups came into being because there are retired people who wish to remain active, who have free time and knowledge to contribute. I recently attended a general assembly of the International Association of Francophone Seniors. They were planning for their next meeting in Belgium. They were planning to try to forge links with Africa to see the aging situation there. Things have changed radically since the days 20 years ago when people were glad to hit retirement age.

PW - Would it be possible to set a figure, with respect to the ideal? What do you think would be the percentage of seniors who are aware of the problems, who participate -- who know there are problems and are taking part in the development of ideas?

MV - Based on the number of people whom I have met in the past five years,m I would tend to think it would be at least 60 per cent. But the problem with that figure is that I tend not to meet those who are alone and isolated. I see the ones who are active, who are involved in projects.

Companies have tended to put early retirement plans into place because of the recession. In 10 years they’ll be having to call back the people they have let go, because they will need "institutional memory". Maybe the result will be a different society. I keep coming back to my notion of a new society. People may want to work, but only three days a week, with flexible hours, like women wanted to do in the 70s. Maybe these so-called retired people can be called back, people who want to try something different.

PW - If, one day, I meet a woman of 65 or 70 who says to me, "Well, here I am, with no one to look after me, and an income of 15,000; I’m in a desperate situation. Where do I turn for a little help, emotional support, social support?" -- what am I supposed to say to her?

MV - There’s a short-term solution and a long-term solution. One starts by suggesting that she seek the help of a group of volunteers or organized services such as the local community health centre or drop-in day services. She needs to go knocking on doors, saying, "I need help, please come and help me." I feel that such a person could readily find such services in just about any community, just like battered women can -- shelters have been set up and they can come with their kids. I think that society has now acknowledged that some people do have great needs of this type. But you have to have humility to be able to say, "I need help."

In the medium and the long term, I feel that the government has a social injustice to remedy, and this is one of my priorities. I call it "women and poverty". I have noted that often in Canada being female and aged 65 equals being alone and poor. It is not you or me or society that has made it this way -- it’s the culture, our traditions. Our mothers never worked outside the home. They never had an income of their own, always lived for their family, and then suddenly became widows. The pension fund was not transferable to survivors. Their children are having their own problems making ends meet, and there they are along, in financial difficulty, with no place to live. I think that things will be different by the year 2000. When I reach retirement age, I’ll have a pension fund. A large majority of women nowadays are in the work force. Our daughters will be retiring under different circumstances, and the fiscal and financial burden will be different. But there is some catching up to do for the women who are in a crisis situation at the present time. The government is aware of that. But we need the leeway to seek the necessary funds, to increase the income of this group of women.

PW - The Federal Seniors Initiative is supposed to end in March, 1993. What is supposed to happen then to the initiatives requiring federal government support?

MV - When thew Prime Minister created the position of Minister of State for Seniors, he created a Secretariat to support and advise the Minister. We stepped up the New Horizons Programme budget. We set up a research fund. We created the Seniors Independence Programme and an 18-member Advisory Council on Aging. This initiative is in place for five years. It is all very well to create a five-year cycle -- the traditional time frame both provincially and federally -- thinking that after five years, an assessment should be done on these initiatives to determine whether to continue as is, or drop them or modify them. The deadline is March, 1993. I have a document on my desk ready for discussion with the Minister’s office. I definitely intend to ask for the policy commitment to be extended another five years. This commitment should recognize initiatives, programmes and supports which are necessary and which will continue to be necessary for the next five years. For this reason, I have consulted various groups which have benefited from the programme, to make sure that I am demanding exactly what they want on their behalf.

The needs of 1992 seniors differ from those in 1987. Increasingly, groups want to run information sessions, research symposia, round table discussion and the like, on transportation, housing, pooling expertise and services. Thus we must request programmes which can be modified and adapted to fit new requirements. I am confident that with my political commitment and with the government’s political willingness, that this initiative will be extended for another five years.

PW - Could you say a few words about the satisfaction you have as the Minister Responsible for Seniors? Your eyes light up when you speak of your work. I get the impression that there is a lot of satisfaction for you in this position.

MV - I think I probably started off with the greatest heritage at birth: excellent health. With just a slight touch of madness, and a lot of patience, a person can bring about change. Throughout all of my years of social commitment, and particularly in the last two weeks with the Referendum campaign, I have repeated this over and over. As a Quebecer, I have seen many changes: the Quiet Revolution, children starting school with the new reforms in place. I have always been associated with progress and changing mentalities. I would venture to say that sometimes I was even a step ahead, preparing for the changes that had to be made. The main thrust of my commitment -- and my responsibility as the Minister for Seniors -- was to constantly seek social justice and to bring about improvements to the quality of life. I have also had a responsibility to society, and my commitment has taken different forms. I was involved socially, as a volunteer; for years i have been involved with women’s organizations, families, schools, automobile insurance, Desjardins Real Estate. This has all led to my becoming a minister within the federal government with the perspective of Quebec within Canada, the role that it can play within Canada. The seniors portfolio takes me somewhat back to my feminist commitments as well. In 1970, I was telling women that we had to work together to find collective solutions. This led to feminist collectives. I said to myself, if I have a problem, I need to get together with 12 or 15 women who have the same problem, so we can work together to find the same solution. Finally, we wee able to put some policies and services in place.

Now, as Minister of State Responsible for Seniors, I feel I have to follow the same course: to break through the isolation of seniors, to develop solidarities and, particularly, to develop pride in being seniors, just as we had to develop pride in being women. This is my greatest source of satisfaction.