Human Resources Committee on May 13th, 2008

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

You talk about the services that people provide for their families. Even that doesn't matter to me. As a senior in your own right, whether you're looking after grandchildren or not, you deserve to retire in dignity and with respect.

Do I have time for one last question?

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Michael Savage]

You have about fifteen seconds.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

It will be a really quick question.

Now that we have changes to the immigration laws in front of us in the House, do you think this bill would be an additional disincentive for the minister, who now has greater discretionary power, to limit the number of family sponsorships and family reunions that become possible in our country?

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Well, I think that's a question I really can't answer. My answer would be a little biased and a little political.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Go ahead.

[Some hon. members]

Oh, oh!

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

This is why I brought up the services they provide and the money they save the government by providing these babysitting services. I really think it's cost-neutral to the government. The services that are provided for and OAS--they are, at the least, cost-neutral, if not maybe a savings for the government, but a government that believes in proper day care.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Michael Savage]

Thank you. That's your time, Ms. Charlton.

We're going to go to the government side. I believe we're going to start with Ms. Yelich, who may split her seven minutes with Mr. Brown, I understand.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Yes, I will.

Thank you very much. This gives us an opportunity to study more about why the old age security is set up as such, because I too was wondering. I have brought immigrants into the country, older people, and they had to wait 10 years. They've actually just succeeded in getting their first income this year from their social security program, so it was indeed welcomed.

However, I wondered as well...and I found out through studying this bill why it was done. I can now understand a little better that it appears the residency is not discriminatory against any country or nationality or origin. In some of the conversation, it almost sounds as though we're under the impression that it is. It certainly has nothing to do with any country of origin. What it has to do with is 10 years of residency. From what I understand, you can be born in Canada....

I actually just spoke with a student who said that if he had been born in Canada.... It's 10 years of residency after 18. So if he was born in Canada and then he went to work somewhere else and came back, he would still have to have 10 years of residency in order to apply for old age security when he got older. So even if you're born in Canada, you have to meet the residency requirement in order to receive old age security.

I would like to dispel any thinking that it has to do with.... Ms. Dhalla brought up the three-year and 10-year, but it's because we have agreements with other countries.

Am I correct in thinking that this would mean renegotiating a lot of agreements with other countries if we changed this? This bill is much broader than just old age security. It means renegotiating agreements with other countries. Have you even looked into what even the cost of that would be? There are a lot of countries with which we have negotiated these agreements. Have you looked into that? And can you provide this committee with the background or what you have found out about the international social security agreements?

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

First of all, it is my understanding that if you were born in Canada and you worked in a country with which we had a reciprocal agreement, those years working there would count if you moved back to Canada to get a pension. I don't believe--

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

It would be pro-rated, though. You'd still be allowed to acquire your old age security, but there would be a pro-rating of sorts.

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

But the years working in a country with whom we had a reciprocal agreement would count.

Now, most of the international social security agreements contain a provision that indicates that the agreement will continue to apply in the event that the Old Age Security Act changes unless either of the countries objects within three months. There are a couple of countries in which there are exceptions, and some programs will require signing a specific protocol, so it's difficult to even know if it will cost anything. It may be neutral.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Well, these are negotiations with other countries, which I'm sure would take...you know, some renewal in negotiating.

I will allow Mr. Brown to take over, but I want to make one comment--since you brought it up--about child care. One reason we find that our universal child care payment is seen to be quite welcome in immigrant families is that they don't have to worry about finding a day care. They do have that money for their choice in child care, and if it be a parent, an immigrant parent or a parent who wants to help with child care--

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Yes, if their parents aren't on the waiting list.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

--that does help them quite a bit.

Mr. Brown.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I just want to welcome Madam Beaumier to the committee.

I would never question her sincerity or her motivation in bringing this forward, but I'm a little puzzled, because of course she was part of the government that was in power for 13 years, from 1993 to 2006. That government fought against the attempt to have this law ruled unconstitutional. They fought it in court twice to uphold it.

Madam Beaumier, as you said during the debate on second reading, the seniors groups, needless to say, ran out of money. I'm a little puzzled about what your thoughts are on that, and why the government you were part of fought so hard to keep the current rules in place.

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

As I said during my presentation earlier, I'm no lawyer--

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

No, no, I'm not asking you to speak as a lawyer, I'm asking--

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

--but there may have been some point of law that warranted fighting the challenge that doesn't pertain to whether or not we should lower the residency requirement as a matter of decency. I don't know what the point of law was that the government fought the charter on.

Why didn't we do it when we were in power? I don't know if you recall or not, but we came into a massive deficit. Canadians suffered--we all suffered--getting out of that mess. We had to set priorities, and the residency requirement was something that would be better handled once the deficit was under control.

I mean, there's a list of things that you have to do. I acknowledge we didn't do it. Perhaps we should have, but you can only get so much done.

[Gord Brown, Conservative, Leeds—Grenville, ON]

No, I understand that. As I said, I'm not questioning your sincerity or motivation, but you've brought this bill forward to Parliament, so I would think you would probably have understood why your government was fighting against it.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Michael Savage]

Let Ms. Beaumier answer if she wishes.

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

We keep talking about “government”. I notice this in every committee. When you say “your government”, I don't even begin to take that personally, as you shouldn't when we talk about government. We're talking about a bureaucracy that gives advice, and perhaps the advice was not the kind of advice I would have taken.

We can keep asking why we didn't do that then, but this is today, and tomorrow is tomorrow. I'm giving you an opportunity to do it and be the heroes.

[The Vice-Chair, Liberal, Michael Savage]

Thank you, Mr. Brown.

We have about 15 minutes left. We have Liberals, Conservatives, and Bloc for five minutes, and then we'll have to decide if there's time for any more. We do have a number of witnesses yet, who've made a great effort to be here, and we want to hear them at 10 o'clock.

Ms. Sgro.

[Judy Sgro, Liberal, York West, ON]

I'll keep my comments as brief as possible.

Ms. Beaumier, I appreciate your being here. I know this is an important issue to all of us. You're aware that we are currently undertaking a poverty study. Hence, this whole issue you are raising of course becomes part of the overall strategy we are looking at--how we deal with poverty in Canada, such as whether or not everybody who lives in this country should be able to receive some sort of guaranteed income to ensure they have a few cents in their pocket, and dignity.

You referenced the south Asian community in particular. And you can tell by the people who are in attendance today that they're clearly watching this issue very carefully. Many of them come over as family members, we all know that, and they end up providing the child care that many of the parents can't find otherwise. The $100 they may receive as a child care benefit isn't going to the senior anyway, because the reality is that it's going in to help them maintain their living standards.

Are you doing or have you done any work on the whole issue of the reciprocal agreement with some of the other countries that don't have it, India being one? Have you had an opportunity to do any up-to-date investigations to see just where we are with those kinds of discussions? And is the government currently in discussions on that?

[Colleen Beaumier, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

No, and basically the majority of newcomer seniors, whom this bill affects, come to Canada from countries where there is no social safety net. So a reciprocal agreement would be very difficult to get with a country that doesn't offer old age security.