Bill C-12

An Act to amend the Old Age Security Act (Guaranteed Income Supplement)

This enactment amends the Old Age Security Act to exclude from a person’s income any payment under the Canada Emergency Response Benefit Act , Part VIII.4 of the Employment Insurance Act , the Canada Recovery Benefits Act or the Canada Worker Lockdown Benefit Act for the purposes of calculating the amount of the guaranteed income supplement and allowances payable in respect of any month after June 2022.

Old Age Security Act

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, my hon. colleague is from the neighbouring riding of Victoria where she is doing great work.

I would just say that we have to finish the work that started under Lester B. Pearson, Tommy Douglas and David Lewis, and that includes pharmacare. It will save Canada money and it will be better for our economy.

People think that our ridings, Victoria and Saanich—Gulf Islands, are fairly wealthy, but I have seniors living in their cars. I have people for whom I pay their electricity bills so that they do not fall out of their apartment and end up living in a car. We have desperate needs, and Bill C-12 will help, but pharmacare is essential.

[Elizabeth May, Green, Saanich—Gulf Islands, BC]

Madam Speaker, as always, it is an honour to rise this evening to speak to Bill C-12.

Over the course of this day of debate, it has been shown that this very simple and very clear bill seeks to fix an obvious mistake that is a source of profound injustice for seniors across Canada, especially the poorest seniors.

I think we know what we are dealing with tonight. I have twenty minutes of speaking time, and I do not plan to use it. This is the end of a long day. It is very clear where we all stand. This bill should pass.

This is very rare for me, by the way. Earlier today I voted for closure. I think in the whole time I have been a member of Parliament, which is astonishingly, and this is a huge honour, coming onto 11 years, I think I have only voted for closure one other time. It offends me to close debate almost every time.

However, seniors have been waiting too long for a simple error to be repaired, and I want to see the bill pass as quickly as possible. I wanted to look at this from a broader perspective and raise something about this. This comes from the comments immediately before mine, from the hon. member for Battle River—Crowfoot, but from those of others as well.

We are here to fix a mistake, something that should never have happened. The seniors who applied for COVID relief were, in many cases, assured it would not affect their guaranteed income supplement. There was bad advice given to many people, as has happened before on other aspects of COVID relief. However, seniors were shocked to find that their guaranteed income supplement had been clawed back.

To fix the mistake, we have to bring another bill to Parliament. Think of how many times this has happened. The member for Battle River—Crowfoot mentioned the three times to fix the CEBA. Think about what happened when we found that there were other unintended mistakes that occurred under COVID relief.

One that is still hanging over us was the change to the Canada Recovery Benefit, which happened in the summer. This was when it looked as though we were coming out of the pandemic, and there was tremendous pressure that we were not getting people back to work because their COVID benefits made it easier for them to stay home. I think we have all heard that narrative. I do not buy into it, by the way.

We have all heard that narrative, that it was hard to get people to come back to work. Because of that, the CRB was reduced from $500 to $300. However, now it is clear that we were not on our way out of the COVID experience. We still have businesses closing. We still have public health orders. They have gone on.

They may be about to be lifted, but the decision that was made in July does not look so good in February. That is so much time for people to have been struggling to hang on at $300. Again, to fix this simple mistake, an entire new piece of legislation is required, and we have to come back to Parliament.

Think about another thing that was promised by the Liberal government in 2020. That, of course, is the Canada disability benefit. It is much needed. We know that, as a community, if we look at people with disabilities, that is the differently abled community, it struggles the most with poverty. The Canada disability benefit is long overdue. It was promised in 2020. It was promised again in the Liberal platform in 2021. I am sure they intend to get to it. I honestly do. I am not suggesting anything to do with skepticism on my part. I think the minister genuinely wants to bring forward the legislation.

However, here we are. People are poor, and they are still struggling with a society that is struggling with the pandemic, and they are still living with being differently abled in a society that does not accommodate them. We pass legislation for a barrier-free society, but we are not there yet.

Again, it needs legislation. I think we can make the case that, after two years in the pandemic, what we have discovered through COVID are the depths of inequality, which many of us had not looked at. I think a lot of us who are arguing all the time to address poverty have looked at it.

We have been very, I hate to use the word smug, but Canadians who are living above the poverty line have a hard time imagining how hard it is for our fellow citizens, who are homeless, dealing with addiction, and unable to find a place to live, even with two people in the same family working.

One thing that struck me regarding COVID-related stories has to do with the spread of COVID. This is a story from two years ago in Ottawa at one of the homeless shelters. The workers and supervisors wondered how COVID had come into this particular homeless shelter, only to discover that two of its regular residents were workers at long-term care homes. This was their address; this was where they lived. They went to work at long-term care homes and brought COVID back to the homeless shelter. Working people doing hard jobs, the frontline workers we needed so desperately, were infected with COVID and brought it to a homeless shelter.

We need to recognize from all these various stories that we do not have a social safety net that works. Our predecessors in this place from another minority Liberal Parliament in the late 1960s, when Lester B. Pearson was the Prime Minister, and the extraordinary people who once were the NDP, managed to use their minority position to push for what was needed. I apologize to my friends in the NDP now, as it is a shadow of its former self without the giants of social justice Tommy Douglas and David Lewis.

We had our whole health care system put in place in the late 1960s. We had the Canada pension plan put in place in the late 1960s. We had unemployment insurance and student loans without interest payments all in that period. I describe it in ways that might make one think the music of Camelot is about to swell in the background, but we had that once.

Here we are in a minority Parliament again. Let us be creative. I ask this of my friends across party lines. This is a moment to point out the inefficiencies of the failure to eradicate poverty when we have the chance. This is the time to accept.

I am very proud of the fact that the Green Party of Canada was the first party in this country to advocate for a guaranteed livable income, but there are many more of us now. Obviously the New Democrats have been advocating for it strongly, and many backbenchers in the Liberal Party are advocating for a guaranteed livable income. Prominent Conservatives are too, like former senator Hugh Segal, whose brilliant book, called Bootstraps Need Boots, was just wonderful. We cannot pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps if we are shoeless.

This is an important moment for us to think about the ways we take on these problems. They are massively inefficient. Each mistake made is not calculated to make the poor poorer, but they have that effect. Each mistake, each piece of legislation and each failure to get the right decimal number cannot be fixed by a simple regulation or a wave of the wand from the minister. Bill after bill has to come back to this place. Let us fix it once and for all. Let us say, as we debate Bill C-12, that we are going to pass this one quickly but are not going to give up on casting a light on what is unacceptable in this country. Poverty is unacceptable in this country, poverty in indigenous communities and poverty in any community.

We are a wealthy country and we have study after study after study on this. The all-party poverty caucus has been holding hearings on it for as long as I have been in this place. These are studies that prove our society will be better. It is not about charity. The health, the resilience and the economic strength of our country will be fortified when we have eliminated poverty, and every Canadian has a roof over their head, has access to pharmacare and is able to live in dignity. Then this place will not be bogged down in a pandemic with realizing over and over again that we have a gap here and a gap over there and more legislation is needed.

Let us be brave. Let us be bold. Let us think like earlier generations of parliamentarians did, and let us think fully about the full range of programs that seniors need, such as affordable housing for every Canadian and long-term care that is not for profit. Let us think about what we can do for housing to ensure that seniors do not need to leave their own home, and let us perhaps have creative solutions to ensure they can stay at home. We know that the costs for seniors living in their own home are far less than if they end up in hospital.

I could go on, but the hour is late and I promised myself that I would not use all my available time, because all of us are of one mind in this place: This bill should pass. Our only difference of opinion is about how fast. I am on the side of as fast as possible. That is the only difference in this place tonight.

While we are thinking about what we need to do for each other and for our parents, I am now a senior. I am in the boat of the 67-year-olds, but boy am I lucky to have such a good, rewarding job. I think we are paid too much as MPs. When we look at the people who do social work and frontline health care work, they do not earn enough, and we may earn too much, but that is a conversation for another day.

I am honoured to have this job. I want to be of service. I ask all of my colleagues who agree to let us get rid of poverty altogether, not with piecemeal, band-aid programs. Let us do the decent thing. Let us show the world that we are committed to social justice, equality, anti-racism, fairness and, above all, democracy.

[Damien Kurek, Conservative, Battle River—Crowfoot, AB]

Madam Speaker, it is good to be able to enter into debate in this place. I am glad that everyone is so chipper even though the debate is going late here this evening. I also thank you, Madam Speaker, for guiding the debate over the course of this evening.

As we address the many challenges we face as a nation, I think it is important that I just make a couple of comments that are not directly related to the subject matter at hand. With the utmost seriousness, we are seeing some of the events taking place around the world, specifically the unrest in Ukraine. My heart and my prayers are with the people of Ukraine this evening, as it seems like a rapidly evolving situation there.

Certainly, it is of the utmost importance that our country has a strong response. I know for myself, and for the members of the Ukrainian diaspora who live in my constituency, it is a very serious evening as they wait on what could be an incredibly challenging time for that country. I would just like to acknowledge that. I want the people of Ukraine who might be watching this to know we are thinking of them and praying for them. I hope, as we face these challenges, that Canada will be there to stand for democracy and what is right in the world.

We are here again for the second debate this week for which closure has been invoked. For all of those who are watching at home, as I am sure there are many, it is when the government moves a motion to limit debate on a particular issue. In this case, it is a problem that the government created. As it was yesterday, when we entered into debate on the situation regarding rapid tests, it is pandemic-related.

Canadians expect all of us in this place to be responsive to the challenges that we face as a country. I would like to backtrack a bit, to July of last year. This concerns those who are 65 and older and, quite frankly, many other Canadians who have depended on or received certain benefits from the government. It is on July 1 that they, in many cases, figure out exactly what the calculation is for their next year's benefits.

As we finished up the spring sitting of Parliament this past June, I started hearing from constituents, as I am sure others in this place started hearing from their constituents, who were concerned that their benefits were going to be clawed back. What has become commonly referred to as the GIS clawback has had a significant impact on many of my constituents. I am sure I am not alone, as I have listened to some of the speeches by other members over the course of the debate today.

Members would think that the government would be quick to respond on what appeared to be a fairly technical bureaucratic issue with the way the benefits were calculated. It depended on how a particular senior, in this case, applied for a benefit, and whether they applied through the EI system or the CRA system, which administered the CERB and other pandemic benefits. In fact, one of my constituents said they applied on the wrong day. If they had applied one day earlier, they would have been okay, but in this case they were facing a significant personal difficulty because of that one-day difference causing a GIS clawback.

There is a reason why I wanted to talk about that time, seven months ago. The government had a responsibility, and I started bringing this up. Letters were sent, my staff were working with constituents, and we were trying to work with the minister's office.

I saw an alarming lack of a response from the various avenues of government that should be ready, one would expect, to serve Canadians, especially some of the most vulnerable in this country, who depend on things like the GIS.

About a month and a half later, after many of these benefits were recalculated for many seniors across this country, which media reports at the time were talking about, we found out that the reason the government was not responsive was because it was putting all its energy and focus not in the best interest of Canadians, but, rather, in an election. It is incredibly unfortunate that however many months later, six or seven, we are now finally getting to the meat of addressing the challenges that these Canadians are facing.

It is unfortunate because this highlights what has been a very concerning trend with the Liberal government. We heard the Liberals say today that somehow it is the Conservatives' fault that we even want to ask simple questions about Bill C-12. I know it is not only Conservatives who have questions. I have heard other questions from my colleague in the Bloc Québécois, the NDP and the Green Party. There are a lot of questions, and the Liberals will have to forgive me if them saying, “just trust me” is not a good enough answer when it comes to addressing the challenges that these Canadians are facing.

When Canadians expected their government to be working for them, it was planning an election, yet it now claims it needs a team Canada approach and that it is the bad Conservatives who are all about delay, or whatever its talking points are for the day. The reality could not be further from the truth. We have a bill before us that would attempt to fix what was a Liberal problem, which has had a pretty significant impact on the challenges faced by seniors.

I spoke to my constituency assistant and case manager earlier today and told her I was going to be speaking this evening on Bill C-12, which has to do with the GIS. I asked her to share with me some of the calls that my office received over the last number of weeks, just a light synopsis so that I could share some of the challenges that seniors are facing. She sent me an email with a number of stories, one of which I would like to read.

A constituent named Larry had to move out of his home, the home he had lived in for more than 40 years, because he could not afford his bills. Further to that, shortly after selling his home and moving into a rental property, he got a notice from the landlord saying that his rent was going to increase the maximum allowed because of the challenges associated with heating costs. Larry had thought that he was in a good position going into retirement, and now he is facing incredible challenges. My constituency assistant listened to his story and his uncertainty about whether he would be able to even get the benefits we are talking about here tonight. These are real stories about real people.

A number of folks have reached out about the cost of heating. I have been sent dozens of heating bills from constituents over the course of the last number of months, as I know members opposite have as well. What is quite tragic is that often the cost of energy is one of the smaller items on those bills, aside from things like the carbon tax, distribution fees and whatnot. Not all of them are in federal jurisdiction, but the costs, especially for those on fixed incomes, cannot simply be absorbed.

There are many challenges that seniors are facing, such as the cost of living. A number of seniors have shared that when they go to the grocery store, they now, more than ever, have to look at things like the cost of milk and decide whether they can buy a jug of milk that week or whether they have to find a less expensive alternative. They have to decide whether they can afford meat or not.

One senior shared with me that her benefit increase, according to inflation, was 65¢ a month. I am not sure if members have been to the grocery store in the last little while, but with the cost of everything, there is not much we could buy for 65¢. These are the challenges that real people are facing.

Further, I have heard from some seniors, including those who have been impacted by this GIS clawback, that they have had to take on debt in order to make it through. Now they are watching the evening news and hearing talk of interest rates. The debts they have had to take on are not long-term, secure lending options; these were last-ditch efforts to try to put food on their tables, and now they are hearing talk about interest rates and feeling more uncertainty.

It is incredibly unfortunate that this is the reality for so many, yet I hear the finance minister and Deputy Prime Minister, whenever she is asked a question about the economy, making accusations that the Conservatives are somehow dragging down the economy. In real terms, the inflation in this country is about twice the amount that wage growth is. That is the minimal indexing that seniors' pensions and benefits get as well as the young family or the student who is simply having trouble making ends meet.

It may be all well and fine for property owners. It may be all well and fine for those who have consistent incomes with guaranteed escalators that many blue-collar Canadians would dream about, but when it comes to the real impacts of the policies of the government, those policies are hurting Canadians.

When we come back to the reality faced by Bill C-12, we do have a chance here to fix a problem, but I think what needs to be noted very importantly is that the role of this place is to ensure against things like the mistakes that have been highlighted and the government's admission of those mistakes through the tabling of Bill C-12, and they cannot blame the significant delays that have been then faced on the Conservatives.

I can tell the House a secret: The only person in the House who can decide when an election will be called outside of the fixed election date that was brought in by the former Harper government is the man who sits in the chair across the aisle. The election had nothing to do with the opposition. I am sure that if the Prime Minister was able to find some creative way to meander around a cleverly worded talking point, he would try to blame the opposition, but he chose to call an election, so here we are at the last minute and the last hour, trying to get this stuff sorted out for Canadians.

I do not think I am even talking in hypotheticals, but my submission is that had we had the chance to more thoroughly debate many of these things, we would not be in this situation. We were criticized yesterday, and it is very relevant to this debate, for asking simple questions about things like the delivery of rapid tests. We have heard many questions today about what this would look like in terms of its possible impacts on future benefits for seniors. In fact, when I heard the minister talk earlier today, she was being completely misleading about former Conservative policies regarding benefits in what I think was an attempt to score some cheap political points. It was truly misleading when she brought forward some of those comments.

This place is unique in the sense that every corner of our country is represented. There is no forum like it. Literally every square inch of our country is represented by the 338 individuals who have the honour of sitting in these seats. What is important and what makes up the strength of our democratic system is the fact that we come to this place with different levels of expertise and different political affiliations. Although I was somewhat disappointed with the number of seats each party got after the last election, which the Prime Minister said he would not call but did anyway, we still ensured that every square inch of this country was represented.

The fact is, we can have debate and can hear from the people of this country. We have a wide diversity of perspectives represented, not just the political and ideological perspectives, but perspectives from different backgrounds. We have a medical doctor who sits as a Conservative, and it is interesting that there are some spin doctors on the other side. Regardless, it speaks to the strength of our system. We have lawyers, social workers and farmers, and I am proud to have a farming background. It is also interesting to note, especially for a certain demographic that happens to be involved in a certain protest that has dominated headlines of late, that I am proud to have a class 1 licence, which means that I can drive those big rigs out front. If anybody needs help moving them I can actually do it legally. I am not sure the Prime Minister can. It is just a little something I am proud of, like the fact that I still farm. I am sure some of my colleagues can share some fun experiences about that.

The strength of this place is in the diversity represented: women, men and different ethnic origins. There are some with a Ukrainian background, and I mentioned some of the challenges they are facing. There are some who are fairly new to Canada, fairly recent citizens, and there are some, like me, who are multi-generational. That is why I find it so frustrating that over the course of my time here since being elected in 2019, the Liberals have seemed to avoid, at all costs, the democratic discourse this place needs to function. That harms our ability to succeed as a country. That harms our ability to be able to function well.

We will disagree about different aspects of politics. Chances are that there are those within this place who will want to read and agree with the opinion columns of the Toronto Star. There are those who would probably agree with what is talked about on rabble.ca. There are those who read the National Post or The Globe and Mail. It speaks to the strength of our democratic institutions.

As I come to the end of this very important discussion, I think it is important to acknowledge, with regard to the substance of this bill, that so many people have been affected by it. We have to take the time that is needed to get it right, because in many cases, seniors like Larry need us to get things right, not like with the CEBA. I think it was after the third or fourth try that it was finally fixed. There are so many other examples, and the discourse that happens in this place is so very important for solving and dealing with the challenges Canadians are facing.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for North Island—Powell River. I have appreciated her leadership on this important issue.

Uqaqtittiji, from the beginning, the government has broken many promises made to Nunavummiut and indigenous peoples broadly, and specifically when it came to rolling out pandemic supports.

In this statement, I will paint a picture of the structural challenges Nunavummiut experience and highlight the importance of passing this important bill. Bill C-12 would fill a small gap in serving the needs of Nunavummiut; however, its insufficiency still presents a problem when one considers the structural challenges already in our wake.

Well before this pandemic, Nunavummiut have also been struggling with an affordability crisis, unemployment, poverty and food insecurity. The Government of Canada states that Nunavut has the highest cost of living. Roughly four in 10 residents of Nunavut are on social assistance, the highest proportion in the country. Basic needs like heating and electricity are even more expensive because almost all of Nunavut's electricity is generated from diesel fuel. There are 25 power plants operating in all of Nunavut's communities that run solely on diesel fuel to produce electricity.

In 2016, 18% of those of working age in Nunavut were unemployed. For the rest of Canada, that number was 7%. According to Food Banks Canada, 57% of households in Nunavut are food insecure and are unable to afford food for their families.

All the while Nunavummiut also continue to struggle amidst a housing crisis. A 2020 report from the Nunavut Housing Corporation said there are an estimated 56% of Inuit that live in overcrowded homes. The Government of Canada states that Nunavut has the highest number of people per household. Overcrowded housing is a central cause of the spread of COVID-19. Why are these structural challenges a persistent struggle for Nunavummiut?

Research from the First Nations Tax Commission notes that hundreds of millions of infrastructure proposals are shovel-ready; however, it currently takes about five times longer to make an indigenous project shovel ready compared to provincial systems.

Why do I share all of this? It is because there are too many structural challenges in the way for Nunavummiut, and they have been waiting far too long for redress by the federal government. Clawbacks on pandemic supports are just another structural failure hurting Nunavummiut, only it is not just another challenge. These failings on the most basic livelihood needs and rights compound and exacerbate the challenges experienced by Nunavummiut.

It is clear that Nunavummiut struggle with an affordability crisis. There is a prevailing struggle to feed families, keep houses warm and keep families safe and out of overcrowded housing, yet the government clawed back the supports Nunavut depended on. It is just not right.

Now that I have laid out this context, I would like to speak more to just how pandemic supports have not only failed Nunavummiut but deepened their struggles. In early fall 2020, the Government of Nunavut expressed fear of possible tax implications, repayment and impacts to social assistance. Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated asserted that many Nunavummiut thought it was a universal benefit and applied in good faith. Messaging was not accessible to Nunavummiut.

The Minister of Health in Nunavut, Minister Main, noted in January 2021 that there was a potential for his clients to get hammered with repayment requirements or clawbacks. Minister Main criticized communications around the CERB rollout in Nunavut saying there was no information provided in Inuktitut.

That, compounded by the lack of Service Canada offices in many Nunavut communities, led to rumours flying about what CERB was and who it was intended for. The Government of Canada later admitted that it had provided poor information.

According to Statistics Canada, close to 10,000 recipients in Nunavut, of which a couple of thousand were income assistance clients, switched to CERB. This ultimately impacted Nunavummiut's eligibility for income assistance programs, which they depend on, like the guaranteed income supplement. Similar to New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland and Labrador, Nunavut treats CERB as unearned income. This has had the effect of reducing social assistance benefits dollar for dollar. This occurred despite the overwhelming struggle with an affordability crisis.

Inuit living in extreme poverty were not in a position to repay. CERB benefits largely went to buy food. We saw food bank visits go down, because CERB finally allowed Inuit to afford to feed their families. Now the government wants them to repay a debt because of the Liberals' mistake. In October 2020, delegates to the Nunavut Tunngavik annual general meeting asked in a resolution that Inuit who had collected CERB despite being ineligible should not have to repay it. Nunavummiut had been waiting for the government to deliver on their most basic rights, not to have these rights further withheld.

Nunavummiut cannot wait any longer. Seniors across Canada cannot wait any longer. The bill before us does not address the many immediate critical needs of many Nunavummiut, but it alleviates the struggles of the most respected in our Inuit community. Canada's poorest working seniors have been cruelly punished by the government simply for receiving legitimate pandemic supports like any other working Canadian received.

New Democrats support Bill C-12 because it answers our demand to exclude pandemic income supports from future calculations of the guaranteed income supplement. The bill would allow some pressures to be relieved from the seniors whom we look so highly to. I hope we can work together on this and do right by our elders and in respect of our elders.

Qujannamiik.

[Eric Duncan, Conservative, Stormont—Dundas—South Glengarry, ON]

Madam Speaker, that was well put by my colleague from the Bloc.

One thing that I want to focus on when we talk about this legislation is something I have heard several members speak about. Yes, we are dealing with legislation that created undue hardship for seniors and needs to be corrected. I think there is agreement on that, but when we deal with pieces of legislation like Bill C-12, I have heard one thing spoken about repeatedly in the House today. It is about the bigger issues that seniors are facing. It is really important to have the proper time to debate bills like this while also raising the issues and concerns that seniors are facing across the country, such as housing prices, rent, the cost of living and so forth.

I wonder if my colleague from the Bloc could speak a bit about the process. We want to make sure we have ministers here and that we as members will have as much time as possible to not only talk about Bill C-12 and talk about the correction that we believe needs to be made, but also to make sure we are getting on the record the stories of our constituents from our respective provinces and regions to make sure that seniors' voices and issues are being raised on the floor.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for her question and her kind words about my speech.

I completely agree. Once again, the Liberal government is adopting a wait-and-see approach for the most vulnerable in society. It is choosing to wait, instead of seeking funds and financing from those who are not vulnerable and could pay more.

The government is choosing once again to stomp on the most vulnerable, as my esteemed colleague mentioned. It is disconcerting that people have waited so long for such an appalling situation to be addressed in such a flawed manner. It is too little, too late and it is not very well done. However, we will have to support Bill C-12, because it addresses a very difficult situation.

[Nathalie Sinclair-Desgagné, Bloc, Terrebonne, QC]

Madam Speaker, I do not want to disappoint my dear colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue who is sharing his time with me, but my son is putting my husband to sleep with some lullabies. He will not be joining us.

The Bloc Québécois has always supported targeted assistance programs that respond to the COVID-19 pandemic, despite the fact that the Liberal government failed to be proactive. We voted for Bill C-2, which was hastily passed in the fall, in order to quickly help the groups most affected by this pandemic. One of our conditions for supporting that bill was that Ottawa stop penalizing working seniors who receive the guaranteed income supplement, or GIS, by treating the Canada emergency response benefit, or CERB, as employment income for the purpose of calculating the GIS.

At the parliamentary committee, the Minister of Finance even admitted that this was a significant problem, but, like senior officials of the Canada Revenue Agency, or CRA, she stated that it was a complex issue that would be difficult to resolve because of the computer system. She nonetheless made a commitment to resolve it.

Here we are today with a bill that would finally correct this injustice being inflicted on our seniors, but that is still disappointing on several counts.

First of all, this bill will ensure that GIS recipients will not be penalized as of July 2022. This may sound good at first glance, but this substantial reduction of their cheques has been going on since July 1, 2021. These seniors have been watching their finances worsen since last summer. Our party made several proposals to the government, urging it to act quickly to ensure that the recipients affected can obtain relief as quickly as possible—as of March 2022, as my colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue hammered home. The government said that this was not possible for technical reasons, more specifically because of computer issues at the CRA. These so-called “computer issues” are pretty surprising for a G7 country.

Furthermore, Bill C‑12 does not include the retroactive one-time payment that the government promised in the December 2021 economic statement as compensation for the reductions that have already been made. We unfortunately do not have details on how the payment will be calculated, but we hope that it will be paid automatically and that the seniors affected will not have to do anything at all. One thing is for sure, seniors have had to wait far too long for this compensation and for their full benefits to be restored. The government only made the announcement on December 17, 2021, in a news release that stated the following:

The CERB and the CRB were designed to provide financial support to employed and self-employed Canadians directly affected by COVID-19. The Government of Canada recognizes that some GIS and Allowance recipients are now facing lower benefit payments this year because of the income they received from these pandemic benefits.

It took the government several months, way too long, to admit there had been a mistake, and now it is taking way too long to act. It is deeply disrespectful to these senior workers who have been impacted by this problem since July. The problem is affecting their financial resources and their ability to buy essentials.

What is really disappointing is that the government is once again attacking a deeply vulnerable population. Everyone knew CERB was taxable income, but when people's income is low enough to qualify for GIS, they do not pay much tax. For GIS beneficiaries who collected CERB, the problem is a simple one. For every CERB dollar they got, the federal government would claw back 50 cents from their GIS. That amounts to a federal tax rate of 50%. We can all agree that is too high.

It is important to note that no one in the federal government informed GIS recipients that their CERB income would literally melt away their GIS benefits. The Bloc Québécois sees this as a major injustice that constitutes prejudicial and appalling treatment. The FADOQ network described the situation as a tragedy. Compensation is urgently needed. The government has known this for a long time, but has not acted accordingly.

Need I remind members of the huge inflationary surge that occurred in 2021? The inflation rate in December was 4.8%, the highest it has been in over 35 years. Prices went up even more for many essential goods. Grocery prices rose by 5.7% year over year, the largest increase in a decade, while housing prices rose by 9.3% relative to December 2020.

It is the most vulnerable, especially people living on fixed incomes, such as seniors, who feel the greatest impact. It is outrageous that the government is doing this to our seniors.

Another big disappointment is that Bill C-12 will not end the inequity between GIS recipients who applied for CERB through the CRA and those who applied at Service Canada. It is important to remember that CERB was administered by the Canada Revenue Agency and Service Canada.

In certain circumstances, when pension income is reduced from one year to the next, claimants may request that their benefits be recalculated on the basis of an estimate of their income for the current calendar year. This is known as the “GIS option”.

We have criticized the fact the “GIS option” is available only to claimants who received CERB through Service Canada, not those who received it through the Canada Revenue Agency.

Indeed, only CERB benefits issued by Service Canada have been legally constituted as EI and are eligible for a “GIS option” review. CERB should be treated the same for all GIS calculating purposes, whether it was issued by Service Canada or the Canada Revenue Agency.

Pandemic-related assistance programs were brought in quickly. However, by the summer of 2021, in other words 15 months after the pandemic began, there were no more excuses for the government to keep reproducing this inconsistency to the detriment of seniors. The government should have used the bill to correct this gap, but clearly it missed the boat yet again.

In conclusion, the COVID‑19 pandemic has affected a lot of people and businesses since the beginning of 2020, but that is nothing compared to the consequences it has had on the senior population with respect to both their physical and mental health, as well as their financial health.

The government is offering a solution that can be described as too little, too late. Once again, that shows that the government is MIA when it is time to help seniors. I would remind the House that this is the same government that chose to create two classes of seniors by increasing OAS only for those 75 and up.

Let us not forget that financial insecurity does not wait for a person to turn 75 to strike. To fix the problem, the Bloc Québécois has proposed that the OAS be increased by $110 a month for all seniors 65 and up. What do the Liberals propose?

They propose a one‑time, non-recurring cheque for $500 for seniors who will be 75 or older as of June 2022. Pre-election smoke and mirrors: such is the Liberal way of governing. With that decision, the Liberals are sending a very negative message to the 970,000 pensioners in Quebec aged 65 to 74, telling them that they do not matter.

In my opinion, Bill C-12, as presented and without the changes proposed by the Bloc Québécois, demonstrates that the government is ignoring the most vulnerable seniors, and that is deeply disappointing. When we watch what this Liberal government is doing, we have the impression that it is downplaying the problem and expecting it to fix itself, which seems to be the norm recently.

We have before us a bill that does seek to fix a problematic situation, but it is flawed. We expected better from the government, after it took so long to address such a serious situation. The people who spent their lives building the society in which we live today deserve more respect from the federal government. The Bloc Québécois will always be there to stand up for seniors.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Terrebonne and, who knows, perhaps little Hadrien as well.

In my time as the member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue, I have heard from many seniors in my riding who are very frustrated about their financial insecurity. They can no longer pay their bills.

Seniors have been the primary victims of COVID‑19. They are the ones more likely to die and to suffer the repercussions of the coronavirus. By repercussions, I mean isolation, anxiety and loss of purchasing power.

In my region of Abitibi—Témiscamingue, much like in the rest of Quebec and Canada, there are seniors who continue to work, in spite of their advanced age. They are still working because they still need an income to live independently.

I remember one woman from Témiscamingue whose supplementary income suddenly disappeared when the schools in Témiscamingue were shut down for months because of the health measures. She could no longer make ends meet but still had to pay her mortgage and car loan, so she applied for the Canada emergency response benefit, the much-touted CERB, as did many other seniors.

She was in for a nasty surprise. A few months after she applied, her guaranteed income supplement was massively clawed back to cover the CERB she had collected. That was a significant hit to her income for months. She spent many long months in a state of anxiety, constantly worried because she could not cover her payments.

That is what I heard from one person in my riding and, sadly, hers is not an isolated case. There are tens of thousands like it all over Quebec and Canada.

The worst of it is that the Liberal government responded by insisting that every CERB dollar received by a senior would result in a 50% cut to their GIS. That is equivalent to a federal taxation rate of 50%. It is the rich who should be taxed at 50%, not the most vulnerable members of our society.

It is appalling and shameful, all the more so because the Liberal government was well aware of the situation thanks to letters the Bloc Québécois sent to the Minister of Seniors and the Minister of Finance in 2021 describing the awful situation that so many seniors found themselves in. It is appalling and shameful because the Liberal Party did not seem to care about the problem these seniors are facing. It took ages to respond even though it has known about this difficult situation since May 2021. That is nine months, and it is way too long.

That is why, despite Bill C-12's shortcomings, the Bloc Québécois will vote to support it because time is running out. Why did the Liberal government wait so long to act? At the very least, the federal government should be able to exclude emergency benefits from the calculation of the guaranteed income supplement payable for any month after June 2022. This will avoid further penalizing GIS recipients as of July 2022.

Bill C-12 is a first step in ending the negative impact CERB has had on the GIS, but it will be too late if it does not happen until July. GIS payments have been reduced since July 1, 2021. For several months now, this has weakened the already precarious financial situation of many seniors. The Bloc Québécois has urged the government to move up the end of its cuts by changing the wording of the bill from “June 2022” to “March 2022”. This change, which would have increased benefit payments more quickly for seniors affected by this problem, was refused, supposedly for IT reasons, which we obviously deplore.

What is more, Bill C‑12 does not contain the retroactive one‑time payment that was promised in the December 2021 economic and fiscal update for reductions that had already been made. The fiscal update read: “The government proposes to provide up to $742.4 million for one-time payments to alleviate the financial hardship of GIS...recipients who received CERB or the Canada Recovery Benefit”.

It is hard for us to understand where the Liberal government is going with this. I think that it is improvising at seniors' expense. I think that this Parliament is not doing enough for seniors. We could do so much more.

Because of the many obstacles that seniors have faced, I personally have decided to start a seniors advisory committee in my riding. Now more than ever, I feel the need to bring the voice of seniors in my region to the House of Commons, because for far too long, they have been the most vulnerable and the most neglected by the Liberal government.

I am speaking in particular of those in rural and remote areas, where people must travel great distances, where there is little or no public transportation, where services are limited and, in some villages, non-existent.

Parliament is not doing enough for our seniors. We must be generous to our seniors. With their intelligence, tenacity, and the taxes they paid, they built everything that we use today: our houses, roads, bridges, hospitals, schools, factories, neighbourhoods and city centres. Our great-grandparents, grandparents and parents who are still living directly or indirectly built everything we own and made us everything we are. This pride has been weakened, and unfortunately that reflects how vulnerable our seniors are today.

We must cherish them and show greater appreciation for them. That is what the Bloc Québécois wants for seniors. That is why the Bloc Québécois is concerned with the quality of life they deserve to have. Seniors were hit the hardest by the pandemic and have received the least amount of support from the federal government.

That is why the Bloc Québécois, through our critic for seniors, the member for Shefford, launched a petition to ensure that our seniors have a decent quality of life. I invite everyone to consult the member for Shefford's Facebook page to link to this petition and to sign it.

That is also why the Bloc Québécois has proposed a series of measures to improve the standard of living for the people who built Quebec, in every single one of our regions, and to bolster their purchasing power. In Parliament, the Bloc Québécois raised the urgent need for legislators to increase old age security by $110 per month for all seniors 65 and older. Furthermore, the Bloc Québécois rejects any attempt to create two classes of seniors through age-based discrimination. Lastly, archaic and discriminatory provisions must be abolished from the Pension Act.

Surviving spouses of pensioners whose marriage or common-law relationship took place after the age of 60 or after retirement are not eligible to receive their late spouse's pension. The Bloc Québécois is calling for these discriminatory practices to be repealed. These provisions are an affront to the dignity of seniors who worked, for example, within the federal public service or in the Canadian Armed Forces. Quebeckers want seniors to enjoy a retirement that reflects the lifelong work they put into helping their families, communities and nation flourish. That is exactly what the Bloc Québécois wants.

This cannot be overstated: Health is Quebeckers' top priority. More than anything else, the pandemic showed us how important it is to strengthen Quebec's health care system. Service cuts in our health care centres this summer made it clear that the consequences of Ottawa's chronic health care underfunding will outlast the end of the pandemic. Ottawa needs to pay its fair share so people who are suffering can access quality health care and so our dedicated health care workers can get reinforcements and the working conditions they deserve.

The federal government needs to increase health transfers, no strings attached, to cover 35% of health care services, as Quebec and the provinces are unanimously demanding. The Bloc would also support home care by means of a tax credit. Quebeckers expect higher health transfers, and the Bloc Québécois has made that its number one issue.

Prices have been rising since 2021. Inflation is the highest it has been in over 35 years. Food prices have gone way up. Housing costs too. This is catastrophic for all lower-income seniors.

The Liberal Party is on the wrong track. Its only solutions are totally inadequate one-time payments. It also chose to create two classes of seniors by increasing OAS only for those 75 and up. That is unacceptable. In closing, let me reiterate: Parliament is not doing enough for our seniors.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, when we suggested some improvements to the short Bill C‑12, I heard some Liberal Party members talk about how making improvements is partisan. That explains a lot. I am starting to understand them more.

I can be slow to catch on, so I would appreciate it if my colleague could explain why, after seniors have endured 21 months of reduced benefits, it is partisan to ask for the payment to be adjusted as of March.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, what I will suggest here is that the focus of tonight's debate is on C-12. The principle and simplicity of this bill speaks to the necessity of it and our rationale was that although we have no reason to delay, we certainly wanted a timely, thorough study on it.

[Shelby Kramp-Neuman, Conservative, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to speak tonight to the first piece of legislation in my portfolio. This legislation would amend the calculation formula for determining benefits payable under the act by deducting the amount received under three COVID-19 benefit acts and a portion of the Employment Insurance Act from a person's income for the year, starting in 2022. While I am thrilled that the government is taking action on this and highlighting its swift willingness to have the backs of Canadians, allow me tonight to speak to the unnecessary delay. This is not a piece of legislation that, in my opinion, the government members should be patting themselves on the back for. This, sadly, is a result of an error that should have and could have been acknowledged and remedied months ago.

I would like to acknowledge the work of the minister on this file. To her credit, she continues to show a willingness to act on this, albeit not as quickly as we would have liked, and more importantly, not as quickly as our seniors needed. As a result of the government's poor rollout of the CRB, scores of seniors have found themselves destitute after they were stripped of OAS and GIS payments through no fault of their own. It seemed as though there were continuous empty platitudes with no timely and clearly communicated solutions.

In my opinion, the government House leader's office was using Canadian seniors to play petty procedural games at the expense of our low-income seniors. Canadians, while they are embracing their golden years, have been hit over the last few years in every conceivable metric. It was just a few months back when I stood in this very place and said that instead of providing the compassion, empathy and support that the seniors who built this great country deserve, the Liberal government has decided to penalize Canada's seniors who took CRB by lowering their old age security payments. I asked this: When will the government reverse this decision and allow our seniors to collect what they have earned? This brings me to today.

Many members from all sides of the House have been representing the voices of their constituents and continuously pressuring the government to act. The government is acting, and for that I am grateful. Sadly, it seems like a bit too little, too late. It has taken eight months for the Liberals to fix the problem that they were aware of nearly two years ago. Yes, we support the principle and the content of the bill, but the attempt by the government to score political points is not acceptable.

Today l was thrilled. We heard from the members for Elgin—Middlesex—London, Calgary Shepard, Kenora, Abbotsford, Calgary Midnapore, Sarnia—Lambton and Parry Sound—Muskoka, and I am confident that all members of our caucus would have proudly stood up had time allowed. All the communities these members represent echo the values of my constituents in small towns in my riding like Odessa, Coe Hill, Tamworth and the many other towns in the great riding of Hastings—Lennox and Addington. I would like to take a short opportunity to thank many of my fellow members for their willingness to speak up for Bill C-12.

Seniors that I have spoken to, and many of us have read the emails, are happy that we are standing up for them. They need our help and I do not think they are asking for too much. The cost of everything is going up. Heating our homes is up 30%. Rent and insurance are up. Groceries are up 24%, and fuel in my riding this week is over $1.50. This is not okay and it continues to go up.

Many Canadian and seniors are exhausted. They are fed up and they are tired of hearing empty platitudes like the government has their backs. They want actions, not words. On top of that, there is fear and concern, stressors of social isolation and elder abuse.

Some seniors completely rely on the GIS, and this clawback was devastating. They are our neighbours, friends, uncles, aunts, parents and grandparents. They are all finding it very difficult to make ends meet. The role of a member of Parliament is to represent the views of the people in our riding. We owe it to seniors to speak to the error that was made. That should not be how a government functions.

Earlier today, as in the last few weeks, we asked for legislative accountability for a simple bill. A payout timeline of May 2022 would leave impacted seniors waiting over 10 months. This situation did not happen overnight. It has been brewing for months, and it was not acted upon until the government was continuously pressed by all stripes of the House. Allow me to remind members that the government, specifically the office of the minister's predecessor, identified there was a known conflict between the CERB and the GIS program that would impact payments from the latter. If the magnitude of the impact of the GIS clawback was truly understood or fully appreciated by the federal government, distribution of the clawback repayment would have and should have already happened.

The outrage, frustration and fear are real. We need to get the money into the pockets of our seniors. We have seen how quickly our government can act when necessary, so why the delay on this?

Clawing back GIS payments from the poorest seniors in the wake of a pandemic was clearly out of touch. It was a flawed design all due to poor communication and lack of delivery. Today in the House of Commons, a member rose and questioned our party with regard to the urgency of the matter and why we were delaying the case. The government has created this unnecessary delay, and I do not understand why the New Democrats are continuously covering up and helping to fix the Liberals' mistakes.

Approving programs and rushing things through do not always work. It seems as though we need to continuously fix and answer the failures of the government. In Hastings—Lennox and Addington, there are a host of issues and concerns, but let me remind members that every day, seniors have been seeking clarification and asking for guidance. It is a plea for help. It is in my nature to help, to be empathetic and to advocate strongly on their behalf, and that is what I continue to do here tonight.

Just this morning, I received a call from a couple who live in the most southern part of my riding. The conversation was filled with a lot of concern and exhaustion. They thanked me profusely for speaking up for seniors, and I assured them that I would continue to do that. They had accepted pandemic supports and had their GIS clawed back. They had never in their lifetime missed a bill payment and have always paid on time. They are so embarrassed because they have overdue bill payments and cannot find it in themselves to own up to it and acknowledge why. They are having a really difficult time. This is just one story of so many. They were definitely relieved, in their conversation with me, to hear there is a fix coming, but they cannot comprehend why they now have to wait until May.

The government has dropped the ball and our vulnerable seniors are feeling it. Everybody has a story. Everybody makes choices on how they navigate through their lives. However, we can all agree that right now our country is in a bit of chaos. When Canadians are in need of more certainty, they are getting less. Many seniors have worked so hard their whole lives to save and invest. Seniors are not looking for a handout; they are seeking a hand up.

Many of our Canadian seniors have stepped up and done what was needed to be done, and it is an expectation that our government will work equally hard to find solutions to the problems they are facing and act on them quickly. Growing older, becoming more seasoned and entering into a different phase of life can be beautiful. Aging gracefully and staying engaged mentally, spiritually and physically in our retirement years is a special chapter of our life to embrace. We are all going to become seniors one day. Some of us already are. Sadly, this is not the case for all people. As we become seniors, we do not all get to enjoy that beautiful retirement phase of our life.

The issues and needs of seniors should be one of the utmost priorities for the government. I am here, and I will continue to be a strong advocate for the people in my riding and the seniors across our country. On top of the clawback issues, many are experiencing loss and loneliness, which of course have been highlighted by the pandemic, regret, lack of proper care, lack of hygiene, dementia, financial and physical abuse, and fear of technology, which is a big one these days.

Currently, COVID-19-related benefits are not listed exemptions under the act for the purpose of benefit calculations. The proposal is to amend the definition of income in the OAS by deducting the amount received from three COVID-19 benefit acts. Do not get me wrong. I am delighted that the government wishes to move forward on this. The goal of this legislation is not to have a repeat of the 2021 GIS clawback. This is great news. My concern is, why the delay? More specifically, why would we not be allowing the House to properly and respectfully review the options that have been presented, respect the process of healthy debate and swiftly move forward in the best interests of all Canadians being impacted? I can certainly appreciate that time is sensitive and that action is required, but not at the expense of ensuring that this bill is presented in its best, most thorough possible form.

A fine gentleman once told me, “The facts, ma'am, just the facts”, so allow me to provide some this evening.

When ministers are called before committees, they have a document prepared for them. It briefs them on topics that may be raised. These binders are available for anyone to read.

In May 2020, the then Minister of Seniors appeared before the Standing Committee on Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. As is standard practice, the minister was prepared a binder by department officials. In that binder, in section 7, under the heading “Questions and answers—COVID-19 Economic Response Plan: Support for Canadians and businesses”, and under “Interaction with CERB and GIS”, the following question appears: “Will income from the Canada Emergency Response Benefit be used in the calculation of Guaranteed Income Supplement benefits?” The answer is as follows:

It is considered to be taxable income and must be considered when determining entitlement to the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Allowances.

This being said, this will not affect the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) and the Allowances for about a year. Income received...in 2020 will only affect GIS and Allowances benefit amounts beginning in July 2021, as those benefits will be based on 2020 income.

This is a verbatim quote from our government, from their own briefing binders, proving that the government was aware of this for at least 21 months and chose not to act. Flags had been raised and tens of thousands of seniors have been affected.

As for this next point, I had not intended to raise it, but listening carefully to the debate in the House today, I heard one of the hon. members from across the floor engage the House to reflect or, in his words, focus on the 10 years before the Liberals came to office. I took that as a welcome opportunity for me to highlight those years in the House.

For the last decade, Canada's population has been in the midst of a fundamental shift. We can all recognize that. The extraordinary change to Canada's demographics can present opportunities. We do not necessarily just have to see these as obstacles. These are opportunities. In response to the member across the floor, I ask members to allow me to indulge in the achievements of the recent Conservative government when it comes to our seniors.

Since 2006, the Harper government created $3 billion in additional annual targeted tax relief for seniors and pensioners. It introduced tax-free savings accounts, TFSAs, which over three million Canadian seniors have opened. It introduced pension splitting for seniors to benefit millions of seniors each year. It improved the rules for registered retirement income funds to allow seniors to preserve more of their retirement savings.

It also introduced the largest increase to GIS in 25 years. As well, the GIS earning exemption was increased. Improvements were made to the CPP to allow individuals who wished to stay in the labour force to also receive CPP pensions. Shall I go on? Perhaps I will leave it at that for the purpose of tonight's discussions.

Especially as a new parliamentarian, I know I cannot, and must not, understate the importance of these stages of the legislative process. What we have in front of us is admittedly a very important piece of legislation. It is a piece of legislation that should have come long ago. Many are desperate, and our federal government has had a significant role to play.

I have mentioned before, while standing in the House, that the role of an effective opposition is not just to oppose but to critique, and our responsibility is to build solutions. We need to ensure that all low-income seniors who saw their GIS clawed back in 2021 are included in appropriate and timely, yet thorough, legislation.

This portfolio need not be partisan. This is not Liberal versus Conservative issue. This is inaction that requires action. I welcome the opportunity to continue to work with the minister and all members of the House to ensure we are all working together and accomplishing the best interests for all Canadians.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the Bloc Québécois recognizes the merits of Bill C‑12. We know that it is an error that will be corrected.

Nevertheless, we also would have liked to propose amendments to this bill. I know that the parliamentary secretary mentioned that the bill is only five lines long.

I would like to know if the parliamentary secretary is aware that the word “March” is only five letters long and could easily be slotted into this bill.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Dartmouth—Cole Harbour, NS]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. colleague need not be concerned about the fact that some of us on this side of the House are environmentalists and like to keep the power bill as low as possible.

I disagree vehemently with the premise of that question. This is a five-line bill that responds to all of the members of the House and what they were asking this government to do. Five lines, what is there to study? The minister was at committee yesterday and was asked about this repeatedly. This debate has gone on all day today and most of the conversation has been about things other than Bill C-12.

No, I do not agree with the member that this needs to be studied more, not a five-line bill.

[Darren Fisher, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my friend, the hon. minister, for splitting her time with me tonight.

It is with tremendous pleasure that I virtually rise in the House this evening to talk about Bill C-12, an act to amend the Old Age Security Act, guaranteed income supplement, at this very important second reading stage. Before I do so, I would like to acknowledge that I am joining the debate from the traditional territory of the Mi'kmaq people.

To echo the words of the hon. Minister of Seniors, the purpose of Bill C-12 is very simple. This bill would permanently exempt pandemic benefits from the calculation of the guaranteed income supplement, the GIS, or allowance benefits starting as of July 2022. As we have heard discussed by my hon. colleagues today during a very thorough debate, our government has a plan in place to get direct compensation to seniors who experienced reductions in their GIS previously. This is not enough, however. We know that we will find ourselves back in the same position four months from now if further action is not taken immediately. We have heard agreement on this from all parties who share our concern in preventing this problem from ever happening again.

The Canada emergency recovery benefit and the Canada recovery benefit continue to play an important role in supporting Canadians who were unable to work throughout 2021 and protecting so many from crippling income loss. To allow pandemic benefits like this to continue being effective and to avoid negative impacts on seniors, Bill C-12 would provide the reassurance seniors need to continue collecting the financial support they need, if they need to do so.

Our government has also helped seniors in many ways beyond direct emergency benefit payments and tax relief. We invested $100 million to improve access to food for Canadians, including seniors facing social, economic and health impacts due to the COVID-19 pandemic. We created a $350-million emergency community support fund to support charities and non-profit organizations to adapt the services that they provide to vulnerable groups, including seniors, in response to COVID-19.

When COVID hit, we had already approved many New Horizons for Seniors projects. As the pandemic's effects became clearer, we gave organizations the flexibility to adapt previously approved projects and use their funding to provide support for seniors' needs specific to COVID-19. In addition, in March of 2020, we invested an additional $9 million via the New Horizons for Seniors program to support projects by community organizations serving seniors. In May of 2020, we invested a further $20 million to expand the New Horizons for Seniors program to support organizations that offer community-based projects that reduce isolation, improve the quality of life of seniors and help them maintain a very important social support network.

It is a sad reality that the COVID pandemic has brought isolation to the lives of so many of our most vulnerable senior citizens. With isolation to stay safe at home, seniors have had challenges maintaining their physical and mental health. Seniors built the Canada that we know and love today and they deserve our support to live with dignity. That sense of vulnerability is real and cannot be overstated. It is why our government has dug deep and continues to dig deep to find ways to address those fears and bring some element of comfort to those deprived of basic securities that most of us take for granted.

To support seniors to live in their homes for longer as they age, we committed to providing $90 million for the age well at home initiative. The initiative would assist senior-serving organizations in providing practical support that helps low-income and otherwise vulnerable seniors age in their homes. It would match seniors with volunteers who can help with meal preparations, home maintenance, daily errands, yardwork, transportation, just name it. It would also help seniors access local services such as shovelling snow, cutting grass, picking up medicine and taking care of other practical non-medical tasks that they are no longer able to manage.

In budget 2021, we provided $3 billion to Health Canada to support provinces and territories in ensuring standards for long-term care are applied and permanent changes are made so that seniors who live in care live in safe and dignified conditions. The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted long-standing challenges in Canada's long-term care homes, as the Minister of Seniors knows all too well.

Gaps have been exposed in infection prevention and control, staffing and infrastructure, with tragic effects on residents, their families and those working in long-term care facilities. That is why, in the 2020 fall economic statement, the Government of Canada committed up to $1 billion for the safe long-term care fund to help provinces and territories support infection prevention and control, through making improvements to ventilation, hiring additional staff and topping up wages.

We are also committed to affordable housing. We plan to build, repair and support an additional 35,000 affordable housing units for vulnerable Canadians, including seniors. This is part of the national housing strategy, which is on track to invest $70 billion by 2027-28 to help more Canadians find an affordable place to call home.

We are working to improve access to palliative care and end-of-life care, including culturally sensitive care by providing $29.8 million over six years to Health Canada to advance the government's palliative care strategy and lay a better foundation for coordinated action on long-term care and supportive care needs.

We are also supporting seniors and Canadians' mental health by providing $100 million to the Public Health Agency of Canada to support projects for innovative mental health interventions for populations disproportionately impacted by COVID-19, including seniors. We have invested $50 million for the Public Health Agency of Canada to design and deliver interventions that promote safe relationships and prevent family violence, including elder abuse.

These are just some of the supports that our government has provided to improve the lives and financial situation of our Canadian seniors. We will continue to look at ways, in co-operation with all members in the House, to improve our supports and services for seniors.

Our government has been there time and again for seniors across Canada. The pandemic has highlighted the many challenges facing our most vulnerable seniors. We have done a lot, but here is an area where we still have a bit more to do. It is time for all members of the House to put aside politics and focus on why we are here as members of Parliament, delivering for Canadians in need of help.

I am hoping that all hon. colleagues in this House will join with us to pass this bill when it comes to a second reading vote.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Minister of Seniors]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to join members virtually from Brampton West, which is situated on the traditional territory of the Anishinabe, Huron-Wendat, Haudenosaunee, Ojibwa and Chippewa people, the land that is home to the Métis and the territory of the Mississaugas of the Credit.

I will be sharing my time with my excellent colleague and parliamentary secretary, the member for Dartmouth—Cole Harbour.

I am pleased to speak on Bill C-12, an act to amend the Old Age Security Act, Guaranteed Income Supplement.

Simply, this bill would exempt pandemic relief benefits from the calculation of the guaranteed income supplement or allowance benefits beginning in July, 2022. Allow me to explain this short, simple and clear piece of legislation a little more and expand on why we are proposing this amendment.

As hon. members may know, and they surely know, when this pandemic first began in early 2020 our government moved very quickly to provide an unprecedented response to a once-in-a-lifetime crisis. We left no stone unturned to help Canadians, from workers to businesses to students to, indeed, seniors.

We did that through introducing pandemic benefits, such as the Canada emergency response benefit and the Canada recovery benefit, to support employed and self-employed people who lost jobs during the pandemic so that they could have a roof over their heads and food on their tables. All of these measures helped millions of Canadians avoid catastrophic income loss. In fact, let me remind the House that $8 out of every $10 that was spent during this pandemic was invested through our federal government. We also know that these benefits are having an impact on some of our most vulnerable seniors.

To start, I would like to remind my hon. colleagues that the guaranteed income supplement is an income-tested benefit payable to low-income seniors who receive the old age security pension. The allowances are income-tested benefits that are payable to 60- to 64-year-olds who are the spouses or common-law partners of GIS recipients, or who are widows or widowers. Every July, an individual's entitlement to these income-tested benefits is reassessed based on their income or the combined income of a couple.

I want to highlight this, as I have heard during debate in the House some members from the Bloc ask why it is in July. It is because July is when income benefits are reassessed, based on the income of the previous year. Therefore, GIS and allowance payments can increase, decrease or even cease according to the changes in a person's annual net income from the previous year.

Let me also clarify for the House that old age security is not income tested, which means that seniors continue to receive it every year. It is not reassessed based on an individual's previous income. In fact, our pension system is designed to reflect the cost of living, with payments only ever increasing or staying the same. They actually never go down. This is something I have heard members from the Conservative Party speak to and debate: that somehow a senior's OAS was impacted by these pandemic benefits. That is simply not the case. Seniors continue to receive their old age security.

The Income Tax Act defines pandemic relief benefits as taxable income, which means that they have also been considered income when determining entitlement to the GIS or allowance benefits. Unfortunately, that means that some seniors receiving GIS may now be facing lower benefit payments because of the income they received from these pandemic benefits.

We recognize that some seniors were facing significant challenges as a result of this, and we needed to move quickly to rectify the situation. I can tell the House that we moved very quickly with our extraordinary public servants to look at all the options possible. We worked very closely with the Minister of Finance, and we did just that.

As a first step towards resolving this issue, we proposed to provide up to $742.4 million for one-time payments. These payments would help to alleviate the financial hardship for GIS and allowance recipients who received pandemic relief benefits in 2020 and saw their GIS affected as a result. This automatic, non-taxable, one-time payment would support those who saw a decrease in their GIS or allowance payments by compensating them for the full annualized loss amount.

We are going to fully compensate seniors for their loss of GIS or allowance benefits, and we are making it simple. Seniors would not need to take any action to receive their one-time payments. These payments would be provided to approximately 204,000 seniors who qualified to receive the CERB or similar benefits in 2020, and as I announced yesterday, we are now going to be able to deliver payments to those who saw their GIS reduced in 2020 ahead of schedule. It will be as early as April 19. To support those seniors in dire need, members of Parliament will be able to work with Service Canada to help those seniors even sooner.

However, we will not stop there. We do not just want to compensate those who saw reductions in the past, because we know seniors continued to struggle to make ends meet and navigate the pandemic into 2021. Some seniors are still facing financial difficulties and relying on benefits to support themselves, and we want to ensure that seniors will not be facing a loss or reduction in benefits again. That is precisely why we introduced this simple but significant piece of legislation.

Bill C-12 would exempt federal pandemic benefits from the calculation of GIS or allowance benefits beginning in July, 2022. Once again, we are proposing this change to the OAS Act to ensure that this problem never happens again. Bill C-12 would make an important legislative change that would provide seniors with peace of mind and certainty in knowing they will not face any undue financial hardship if they continue to access pandemic relief benefits.

As Canadians know, the well-being of seniors, especially the most vulnerable, has been a priority for our government since 2015. I will remind the House of some of the measures our government has put in place and some of our priorities moving forward. We made seniors' financial well-being a top priority. One of the very first things we did as a government was restore the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS to 65 from 67. We also increased the guaranteed income supplement, which has helped over 900,000 low-income single seniors and has lifted 45,000 seniors out of poverty. We have enhanced the CPP, which was mirrored by the QPP.

We are also moving forward with our plan to increase the OAS pension by 10% for seniors aged 75 or over in July, 2022. This increase will provide an extra $766 to full pensioners over the first year. To help address the urgent needs of this group of seniors, we provided a one-time payment of $500 last summer. We provided this one-time payment to support older seniors who face higher financial pressures, because we know that as they age seniors tend to have lower incomes and often face higher health-related expenses, all while they are more likely to be unable to work, to have disabilities or to be widowed. Simply, we followed the facts and evidence. We understand seniors' needs grow as they age, and we are there to support them. Of course, a big part of my mandate is to increase the guaranteed income supplement by $500 for single seniors and $750 for couples.

During the pandemic, the focus of our support was always on people. We helped millions of Canadians with pandemic supports and benefits. We delivered direct payments to seniors and families, and when we saw that some seniors were affected by this, we took action to support vulnerable seniors who experienced reductions in their GIS or allowance as a result. With Bill C-12, we can ensure that low-income seniors would not have to face a reduction in their GIS or allowance benefits again if they took them in 2021, or if they find they need to access relief benefits in the future.

As I have said, this pandemic has worsened many challenges facing the most vulnerable seniors and those who care for them. We are constantly working hard to find permanent solutions that will bring ongoing comfort and relief to people whose hard work, and in many cases sacrifice, has contributed to the Canada we are so proud and privileged to call home.

Seniors deserve nothing less than the best from us. They do not need delays or political games at this crucial moment, and I really hope all members in the House will join us in moving quickly to pass this bill.