Left to right at the Jewish Seniors Alliance of BC Fall Symposium Nov. 23: Jeff Moss, Joyce Murray, Anthony Kupferschmidt, Dan Levitt and Isobel Mackenzie. (photo by Alex Roque Photography)
The Jewish Seniors Alliance of British Columbia’s fall symposium featured a panel discussion on the responsibilities of governments for seniors. The panelists discussed housing, transportation and healthcare services. They explored challenges in funding, staffing and service delivery, while also touching on topics such as the potential for community involvement in shaping senior support systems.
The Nov. 23 gathering, which took place at the Jewish Community Centre of Greater Vancouver, opened with Jeff Moss, executive director of JSABC. He said provincial advocacy is “at the heart” of what JSA does, “and bringing together politicians in this space is really important, because the conversations that we have when we meet with the provincial government, or when we’re meeting with the opposition, [are] where we are advocating strongly for universal free home support for seniors in British Columbia.”
JSA’s partners in this campaign are Council of Senior Citizens’ Organization (COSCO), the BC Health Coalition, the Independent Long-Term Care Councils Association of BC, Family Caregivers of British Columbia and the BC Care Providers Association (BCCPA), whose chief executive officer, Mary Polak, addressed those gathered.
Polak shared that her father, who’s 96 years old, is in long-term care. He has some dementia issues and needs to have some specialized care, she said. “But in the time that he was at home with us and we were trying to give him the best quality of life we could in our own home, it was a real challenge to try and support that with home health services. And we were in a better place than many because at least we had some of the financial capacity to do that, and we had the family around us. But, for an increasing number of people, that’s becoming impossible, and it shouldn’t be that way.”
Ezra Shanken, CEO of the Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver, which also is a partner and supporter of JSABC, introduced Shay Keil, who sponsored the event with the BCCPA and JSA, along with Michael and Sally Geller, and the Zalkow Foundation.
“Seniors are the foundation of who we are,” said Keil. “You’ve built our families, our traditions and our values, and you deserve to be honoured, supported and celebrated. We often speak of m’dor l’dor, from generation to generation, and that idea is very close to my heart. I strongly believe in the connection between seniors and children and everyone in between. That belief is why I’m here today, and why I’m deeply committed to community through volunteering, supporting and staying actively involved in the organizations that strengthen the lives of those around us, including JSA.”
Keil introduced the emcee of the panel, Isobel Mackenzie, “who served as British Columbia’s seniors advocate from 2014 to 2024, and has spent her career championing the well-being, safety and dignity of our seniors.”
Mackenzie asked each panelist to come to the stage: Anthony Kupferschmidt, strategic lead for aging and older persons with the City of Vancouver, who has worked in similar capacities with other cities and groups, and is also a gerontologist; Joyce Murray, who has served both as a member of the Legislative Assembly and as a member of Parliament; and Dan Levitt, a gerontologist who has worked 30-plus years in seniors care, and is the current seniors advocate for the province.
Each panelist gave an overview of their opinions, starting with Kupferschmidt, who noted that much of what a municipality can do for the aging population requires financial support from other orders of government. However, a city can impact seniors in such areas as “zoning and related development charges, making sure that we have the right type of housing and the right mix of housing across the city.”
Municipalities can work with the provincial government, for example, on where care homes are located and support their development. Transportation is another key area, as are sidewalks and other “elements of an age-friendly city.” Cities have a role with respect to public libraries and the accessible services they offer, community centres, senior centres, pools, arenas, etc.
Levitt was the next to speak. “Currently, there are 5.5 million people living in our province, 1.1 million people are over 65,” he said. “Today, there’s one in five – 20% of all people are seniors. Fast forward just a decade from now and it’ll be one in four, 25%…. We have more people who are living longer and more people who are seniors, so 400,000 more seniors in the next decade.”
Levitt’s office monitors five areas: health care, transportation, housing, income and community services.
“The general trend,” he said, “is that there are more seniors and there are more investments, but there’s less available per senior.”
As an example, he said, a quarter of all seniors are living on $23,000 a year, or less than $2,000 a month. “And it’s not that hard to go find people living in the West End in affordable housing living on less than $1,000 a month, so they really need that income support from all levels of government, they need those subsidies.”
Levitt said there were 13,000 people on the waitlist for affordable housing last year. “How many of them got a space?” he asked. “Six percent, just under 800 people have got a space for affordable seniors housing in our province. We haven’t built enough, and there is a call right now to build more, but we’re not keeping pace with that demand.”
As well, he said, the province has been taking money away from long-term care homes, no longer funding overtime and agency nurses, for example, and this affects places like the Louis Brier Home and Hospital.
“It means that an already very thin margin is now almost impossible to operate without that government subsidy,” said Levitt.
“We haven’t invested enough either in seniors care,” he added. “We did a report in July, and our July report identifies that over 16,000 people are going to be short long-term care because we’re not building enough beds. There are 7,200 people on the waitlist today.” The burden of care, he said, is being transferred to families.
Murray took the conversation in a different direction.
“I was looking at the budget numbers about this when I was thinking about what I would be saying,” she said, “and the total new spending on OAS [Old Age Security] and medical care for seniors alone in the 2023 budget was $110 billion of new money…. Now, that’s going to tie into some of the demographics, for sure, but, when you break that down, that’s $4,300 per retiree 65 and older in new money in the 2023 federal budget versus $755 for younger Canadian under 45 in new money.”
She wondered about how well younger people were being supported. She also spoke of environmental concerns.
“What does it mean to be a good ancestor?” she asked. “And what do we think our society, our province, our country needs to do so that we collectively are good ancestors?”
“To govern is to choose,” said Mackenzie, noting that governments must make decisions about how “to allocate our finite resources to our infinite demands.”
The panelists talked more about that, as well as the way in which different levels of government work with one another. Murray said governments make policies they hope will attract voters, and seniors tend to vote more than younger people, so, for example, “a family with two members can earn up to $180,000 a year and still get their full OAS,” she said, asking, “Is that a good allocation of money?”
Mackenzie asked a variant of Murray’s question, considering how maximum monthly payments for public long-term care work.
“The person whose income is $200,000 a year is going to pay the same for their publicly funded long-term care plan as the person whose income is $70,000 a year,” said Mackenzie. “And so, if, on the one hand, we say, well, the people who have more should get less, which is the OAS argument, to what extent should we flip that and say, well, the people who have more should pay more when it comes to publicly subsidized long-term care? That’s, I think, missing from the discussion…. I think there are very uncomfortable conversations … that governments are going to have to have with their electorate and, as elected officials, you don’t like to have those uncomfortable conversations, for obvious reasons.”
Levitt thought the situation could be improved if governments helped people understand how much money they need to save to age well, what supports there would be for them as they age, and what people could do to support themselves.
Murray suggested, “Maybe what we need is like a citizens’ assembly, to start out by identifying what are the key things that are maybe broken or need improvement so that we can be good ancestors. And then have a citizens’ assembly that looks at what are the best solutions in other countries … and then create a proposal on that. I think we have to crowdsource the solutions here…. We need citizens to help us solve this.”
Kupferschmidt brought up Better at Home, a basket of non-medical services that seniors can access. “There has been public engagement into what those services should be…. However, there are examples of the service that is offered in one neighbourhood in the city is different than another,” he said, explaining that a “model with all the best intentions can sometimes create some disparities as well.”
Mackenzie stressed the complexities, both because everyone’s needs and everyone’s solutions are different. “And, in the end, in those environments, generally, we try to come up with solutions that meet the greatest good for the greatest number, but that certainly doesn’t meet the need for everybody all the time and that is, I think, the political challenge at all levels of government, whether they be the local, the provincial or the federal.”
