by Peter Ferguson

In spite of the current worldwide recession, Canada is indeed a fortunate country. We are among the most prosperous in the world and Canadians rate high on longevity. However, it is always possible to do better and to do more. Our prosperity is very unequally distributed and too many Canadians live in poverty. Aside from the important issue of fairness, this has huge implications on the overall health of Canadians and the continued prosperity of our nation.

As well, despite our longevity, we are not particularly healthy. Too many Canadians die too early from preventable chronic diseases (cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer); too many others live out their years with diminished quality of life because of chronic conditions. The toll on quality of life is of first importance, but this also has staggering financial implications.

For many of us, years of poor diet, lack of exercise, and increased stress levels (often related to work and financial worries) finally catch up with us as we grow older. As the wise saying goes: “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”. This has been reiterated by the Conference Board of Canada, which in a recent report, suggests that The Canadian Heart Health Strategy and Action Plan to combat heart disease alone would save Canada’s’ economy over $75 billion dollars over the next ten years. While I don’t formulate NDP policy, I do believe our party has the good fiscal sense to recognize that an investment in health and happiness that also pays back $5 for every $1 invested seems like something well worth investigating – and soon. I wonder if the other two parties are taking this seriously?

Another aspect of health and chronic disease prevention is money. Not just that spent by governments on our universal one-tier health care system, but by individual Canadians having more money to take better care of themselves. This is where the issues of pension and EI reform enter in the discussion.

In 2000, 13% of Canadians were over the age of 65. By the year 2020, 18% of Canadians will be over 65. A financially secure and happy retirement for many Canadians will increasingly be dependent on a smaller workforce. That’s why it is important that Canadians look seriously and soon at pension reforms of the type suggested by The New Democrats. For example, of Canada’s 4.3 million seniors, over 300,000 currently live below the poverty line. The maximum GIS/OAS annual payments of just over $14, 000 provides these seniors with less than the minimum poverty line level of $18, 400 in most Canadian municipalities (where most seniors live). In addition, half of the remaining 4 million Canadian seniors who are living above the poverty line are classified as low income.

The NDP proposes that instead of the $1.5 billion annual tax cut/give-away to profitable corporations (which took effect Jan 1st, 2010) it is better fiscal policy -and better human policy - to provide the $700 million dollars directly to the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) program, to lift seniors out of poverty. Imagine your mother or grandmother (yes, most seniors living in poverty are women) now having that extra money needed to live longer in her own home, to buy fresh produce, to afford transportation to get out and socialize (social isolation is a major cause of depression), to enjoy a movie or sporting activities. All of these activities promote a longer and healthier life and allow her to contribute directly back to the local economy. The Conservative tax cut to corporations does none of these things.

Consider that about 70% of businesses fail in their first year. While this is a fact of life and business - and this risk-taking is ultimately good for the economy - none of these businesses actually planned to fail. None of them applied for credit with a business plan that said: ”we need to meet a target of 50 x to succeed - but we’ll only strive for 25 x”. No money would be forthcoming! Yet Canada’s CPP, as currently structured, is designed to be inadequate. It’s based on supplying seniors with payments that amount to about 25% of their annual working years salary whereas most wealthy European nations have pension plans designed to supply 50% of working salary. No wonder too may Canadian seniors live in poverty, and why even many of those at or above the poverty line are struggling financially, too.

Finally, not only will those now working be supporting more retirees, many are wondering if/when they will be able to retire, and if their retirement will be comfortable. In addition to worries about pensions (a sure stressor), many working Canadians are living with worries about their current jobs and work, in general. It’s often said that increasingly we will have more jobs and have different careers throughout our working life. We need a more complete and flexible EI coverage system that takes into account this reality.

Canada’s pension, EI, and medicare systems were all born in the 1960’s when Canada’s demographics and economy were different. All three programs came into being with leadership (and strong pressure) from the NDP, which was supporting the Pearson minority Liberal government. It is time for both EI and pensions to undergo serious modernization. Mere tinkering will not do. I believe it is again time for the New Democrats to lead this modernization.