Debates of Feb. 15th, 2022

Government Business No. 7—Proceedings on Bill C‑12

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage has seven minutes and 30 seconds remaining in his elocution.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Canadian Heritage]

Mr. Speaker, in regard to your ruling with respect to masks, we have been hearing, from the opposition, a lot of shouting about science. They say, “Listen to the science.”

However, the number of MPs who removed their masks as soon as your order was issued is rather shocking. The science is clear on masks, and I truly hope that the hon. members on the other side who are heckling me, maskless—

[The Speaker, Liberal, Anthony Rota]

Order. I want to make sure individuals and MPs recognize that whoever has the floor should have the respect of the House. I also want to remind the hon. member that the decision from the Speaker clarified what the policy was, and I would hope that everybody would respect that.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I also hope that the opposition respects what the Speaker said, which was that he highly encouraged the use of masks. We were being lectured on science and that we should listen to the science, and the science is clear on mask usage. I am seeing a lot of unmasked faces on the other side, and that is disappointing because, as we are talking about vaccinations—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. Again, I think that matter has been dealt with, and I would ask the parliamentary secretary to speak to the issue that is before the House, which is Bill C-12.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I was just moving on to seniors, who are looking forward to us listening to science and listening to public health. I will move on to the debate at hand.

I had already given some of my remarks before the break, but as a first step, our government is providing $742.4 million for one-time payments. These payments would help alleviate the financial hardship faced by GIS and allowance recipients who received pandemic relief benefits in 2020, but who also faced a reduction or loss of their GIS or allowance benefits in July, 2021.

As the payments would be automatic, seniors would not need to take any action to receive the one-time payments. These payments would also fully compensate affected seniors. They would be non-taxable, too. We estimate that the 183,000 GIS clients who qualified to receive CERB or similar benefits in 2020 would benefit.

We did not want to just provide a quick fix. We also wanted to ensure that seniors would not be facing such a loss—

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

Order. The hon. member has the floor. There are a lot of discussions being had here, and I know that they are side discussions.

I would just ask members to please step outside the chamber if they wish to have side discussions. I am sure that they want to attentively hear what the hon. parliamentary secretary has to say, because I am sure they are going to have questions and comments for him.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am sure they are just excited to hear the rest of my speech. The buzz on the other side is encouraging for me to keep going and defend our seniors.

As I said, we did not want to provide a quick fix. That is why we introduced this bill. Bill C-12 would permanently exempt federal pandemic benefits from the calculation of GIS or allowance benefits, beginning in July, 2020, and would prevent this from ever happening again.

To be clear, the following benefits would be exempt: the Canadian emergency response benefit, including any CERB amounts paid under the Employment Insurance Act, the Canada recovery benefit, the Canada recovery sickness benefit, the Canada recovery caregiving benefit and the Canada worker lockdown benefit. 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 certainty and peace of mind in the future if they receive GIS and allowance benefits to which they are entitled, without the need for a one-time payment.

To strengthen Canadians' financial security later in life, we provided one-time payments of $500 in August, 2021, to OAS pensioners who would be age 75 or older on June 30, 2022. We are also permanently increasing OAS pensions for seniors 75 and over, beginning in July, 2022. We have taken these steps because seniors face increased financial pressures and vulnerability as they age, but the well-being of seniors has been a priority for our government since 2015.

Before COVID, we had already improved the Canada pension plan, reduced income tax for seniors and moved to enhance the GIS. We increased the GIS for nearly 900,000 low-income seniors. As a result of this and other measures, an estimated 45,000 seniors were lifted out of poverty. We put thousands of dollars back in the pockets of future Canadian seniors by restoring the age of eligibility for OAS and the GIS to 65 from 67. Many of the members on the other side voted in favour of actually increasing the retirement age, not for their own pensions but for other seniors in Canada.

We enhanced the GIS earning exemption for working low-income seniors to help them keep more of their benefits and more of their hard-earned money. This means that seniors could earn up to $5,000 without a reduction of their GIS benefit. Our government is moving forward with its plan to increase the OAS pension by 10% for seniors 75 and over, and will start in July of this year to provide people receiving the full OAS pension with an extra $766 in the first year. This will be the first permanent increase to the OAS pension, above and beyond inflation adjustments, since 1973.

We reduced income taxes for seniors by increasing the basic personal amount. Once we have fully implemented this measure in 2023, 4.3 million seniors will benefit, and 465,000 of them will see their income tax reduced to zero.

Our government has helped seniors in myriad ways beyond direct emergency payments and tax relief. We recognize the sad reality that the COVID pandemic has brought isolation to many seniors, and to our most vulnerable seniors. The sense of isolation and vulnerability cannot be overstated, so our government continues to find ways to address those issues.

The pandemic has tragically highlighted the challenges to long-term care homes. It has exposed gaps in infection prevention and control and staffing. That is why, in the fall economic statement, our government committed up to $1 billion to the safe long-term care fund to help provinces and territories support infection prevention and control, make improvements to ventilation, hire additional staff and top up wages. We are also committed to affordable housing, and we are working to improve palliative care, end-of-life care, and to supporting Canadians' mental health through the Public Health Agency of Canada.

In conclusion, I am proud of the measures we have developed and are still developing on all aspects of senior care, but this must not simply be a stopgap measure. We are constantly working hard to find permanent solutions that will bring ongoing comfort and relief to the men and women who have worked hard, who have contributed to Canada and who are proud and privileged to call it home. Seniors deserve nothing less than the best care and consideration that we can provide. We acted quickly to resolve this issue. I hope my hon. colleagues will agree that this bill deserves swift passage.

[Marilyn Gladu, Conservative, Sarnia—Lambton, ON]

Madam Speaker, the member opposite is from my former hometown of St. Catharines. I heard him talk about the increased OAS, and the $500 bonus that those over age 75 were going to get. I had been critical before that the government disenfranchised seniors between the ages of 65 and 75, but I noticed that the mandate letter of the minister says that she is supposed to increase the OAS and the GIS for seniors over 65.

Would the member opposite not admit that this recognizes the huge failure of the government, when it disenfranchised seniors between the ages of 65 and 75?

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I know the hon. member for Sarnia—Lambton speaks to many residents and seniors in her community, as I do and as all members do. We have to recognize that seniors 75 and older have challenges that are greater, in many cases, than those who are ages 65 to 75, as retirement savings dwindle or as there may not be the resources that were once available. It is the government recognizing that there are additional challenges. This was a campaign commitment that was made in 2019, and it is one that the government delivered upon.

[Yves Perron, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague listed all the wonderful things that his government has done for seniors. I will repeat for him the headline of an article published this morning in the Journal de Montréal: “Seniors starved by Ottawa”. It is not the most complimentary headline I have seen.

This article mentions two of my constituents: Bob Petit, of Saint‑Jean‑de‑Matha, whose GIS was cut by $350 a month, and Jacques Rhéault, of Louiseville, whose GIS was cut by $400 a month.

Can my colleague explain why the government did this deliberately? The Bloc Québécois sounded the alarm last summer in July 2021. Today, we are seeing a bill that will come into force only in July, yet people are going hungry right now. That is disgusting.

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I would like to remind the hon. member that these supports, and this legislation, passed with the unanimous consent of the House. The minister has acted swiftly since her appointment last fall to correct the situation. This bill is part of that. I am happy that most of my colleagues in the opposition are seeking swift approval of this legislation to get it through as quickly as we can. Hopefully we can see that done rapidly.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Madam Speaker, I have a gender question for the member. We know that women were limited in the work that they could do. There were only a few roles that were considered to be women's roles back in the thirties, the forties and the fifties. We know that wage gaps continue to be discriminatory. Getting a mortgage without a man as cosigner was not possible for many women in the 20th century.

My question to the member is about the GIS clawback. How did it affect women?

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, I am not going to disagree with the member. I know that her party is supportive of the speedy passage of this legislation. I thank her and her party for that support. I look forward to seeing this bill pass.

[Kevin Lamoureux, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons]

Madam Speaker, today is a special day because it is flag day. Just out the window, we can see the national maple leaf flying on top of the Peace Tower.

Can the member provide his thoughts on how wonderful and important our flag is to our country?

[Chris Bittle, Liberal, St. Catharines, ON]

Madam Speaker, our seniors love our flag. I will bring it back to the bill. It is important to recognize that it was an MP for Kingston and the Islands who brought this flag, and this design, forward. It is a renowned symbol. It is something that not only seniors, but all Canadians can appreciate.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

We have a point of order.

The hon. member for Kingston and the Islands.

[Mark Gerretsen, Liberal, Kingston and the Islands, ON]

Madam Speaker, it was actually a member for Leeds, which is just east of Kingston.

[The Assistant Deputy Speaker, NDP, Carol Hughes]

I appreciate the additional information; however, that was not a point of order.

Resuming debate, the hon. member for Kitchener Centre.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to rise this afternoon to speak about Bill C-12 and the needs low-income seniors are facing across the country.

Over the last three years I have had many opportunities to speak with hundreds of seniors in Kitchener. I often knocked on doors in the daytime and who is home in the daytime? It is seniors. I would joke that it was seniors I spoke with most. In those conversations, I would ask them what was most important to them and hear their stories about rent going up, as well as the cost of groceries, transit, in fact the cost of everything. The reality is that the cost of living for seniors is going up much faster than the guaranteed income supplement or old age security. I would hear their anxiety, sometimes their anger, and I promised that as their MP, I would advocate for their interests in this place.

We have to recognize that the maximum amount for a single senior who is eligible for both GIS and OAS is just over $1,600 a month. I would encourage other parliamentarians to reflect on financial planners who might advise that people spend 30% of their income on housing and start doing the math on what it looks like for seniors on low incomes, living on GIS and OAS.

That brings me to what I appreciate in this bill. To me, what the governing party is doing in this bill is admitting that a mistake was made. There never should have been any clawbacks whatsoever on the lowest-income seniors across the country. It is just not right and this legislation addresses that.

I also really appreciate both the Bloc and the NDP, in particular the member for North Island—Powell River and the member for Elmwood—Transcona, for their advocacy in ensuring that these funds are provided as soon as possible, recognizing the situation in which low-income seniors find themselves in Kitchener and across the country as a result of the clawbacks that were made and recognizing that this legislation would only really address this mistake not happening again going forward. The fact that we are addressing it not happening again and that there is a retroactive reimbursement being applied in the last fiscal update is really important.

It is also important for us to step back and notice when there is wild agreement in this place. That certainly was not the case in question period. In fact it is usually not the case in question period, but all day I have heard different parliamentarians tripping over themselves to share how much they are advocating for low-income seniors in their communities, which is quite rare in this place. It does not matter which party. I heard a parliamentarian advocating from every region and part of the country. This, to me, is encouraging and gives me the sense that it is possible, when there is obvious good policy in front of members here, for us to move ahead and get it done.

I will also share where I think we could be going further and faster. The first is with respect to the funds flowing. There was a really wonderful line of questioning, in particular, from the MP for Salaberry—Suroît in committee yesterday, who said the reason that funds are not flowing for all low-income seniors until April 19 is that we have not been investing in the computer systems that our public service relies on to deliver these funds.

I can appreciate that it might not always be politically attractive to be investing in IT, but I feel this is an opportunity for us to recognize that this is how seniors' lives are being affected. There is not a fancy ribbon-cutting, but when those investments are not being made, it directly affects the lives of seniors across the country. To my understanding, it is not for a lack of interest by the governing party in flowing money sooner, or the advocacy of others across the floor, but rather because we have not invested in the IT that we should have invested in years ago. I would encourage all parliamentarians to consider supporting our public service, so it is able to follow through on these important investments.

Second, I want to call out how important it is that we actually have a private member's bill in support of a guaranteed livable income for all. While I wish it were a government bill, the fact that we have Bill C-223, put forward by the member for Winnipeg Centre, gives us an opportunity to have a larger conversation recognizing that even seniors who will not have GIS and OAS clawed back are still living in poverty in most regions across the country.

We should be doing so much more to ensure that every senior in the country is at a dignified level of income. These are the folks who have been building the economy and these are our elders. With the guaranteed livable income we would not even be having the conversation we are in the midst of now. I encourage other parliamentarians to consider their support for that private member's bill and their support for moving toward a guaranteed livable income across the country.

I also want to point out the need for us to make more progress on housing. We cannot talk about seniors on low incomes and the importance of addressing the clawbacks if we are not going to be honest that it is housing that is climbing the fastest, which at least is something else that I have heard parliamentarians from every party talk about. Maybe there might be different solutions that are being offered, but at least it is a place for us to start having good, respectful conversations. In Kitchener, there is a 35% increase in the cost of housing and rent.

I think about seniors in Kitchener who are not just seeing the cost of housing go up, but they are seeing a lack of access to dignified housing and also the proximity of that housing to the amenities that they need the most, such as transit stations they need to access. We need to move forward far more quickly when it comes to addressing the rising cost of housing, which means addressing the supply as well as the policies to ensure that homes are for people, for seniors, to live in and not commodities for investors to trade.

The last thing I will mention is the importance for us also to address long-term care. While not the main focus of this piece of legislation, if we are going to be talking about the need to be taking better care of our seniors, we have all recognized the gaps in long-term care. There is the opportunity for the federal government to step in to improve the standards in long-term care, to address the wait times and to address the pay for personal support workers.

In closing, I would encourage all parliamentarians to continue to support this important bill and to get this done, but not to stop here. We must ensure that we move forward quicker, whether it is on the cost of housing, a guaranteed income or ensuring that these reimbursements are provided at the earliest opportunity.

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

Madam Speaker, as the member for the Green Party mentioned in his comments today, there has been support for this legislation going through. There have been some issues of process, which have been the challenge and making sure that Parliament has the appropriate time to discuss and debate exactly what he spoke about today. This is to fix a problem we should have fixed a very long time ago. I think of my constituency office where we saw some of these programs announced at the beginning of the pandemic and how red flags were raised then. Here we are now two years later correcting a problem and the government is saying we need to do this right away.

I agree with the member completely that housing for seniors and rent is a big issue as well as the cost of living. Having the proper time for these bills and to discuss the issues that seniors face in general is something we need to do. I wonder if the member could comment on the process and why we need to rush these things all the time as opposed to having debates on the substantive issues that people in Kitchener and the country are facing.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the question on process and I have heard the concerns raised by members across the way with respect to the speed of the passage. I would have liked to have more time. However, recognizing that there are other priorities to continue to move toward, recognizing the bill in this case is literally one page, in my view this is an example where it may not be ideal but my interest is in ensuring that seniors get as much support as quickly as possible. My interest is in continuing to move ahead.

[Denis Trudel, Bloc, Longueuil—Saint-Hubert, QC]

Madam Speaker, my colleague spoke about both housing and seniors. It is impossible to talk about poverty among seniors without also talking about housing.

Housing is a huge issue in my riding. Some 2,000 people are on a wait list for low-income housing.

My colleague is familiar with the rapid housing initiative because I believe we already talked about it at a Zoom meeting. The federal government launched this program two years ago during the pandemic. It is not a bad program for creating social housing, but it is unfortunately very underfunded. The program had a budget of just $1 billion, but it received applications for projects totalling $4 billion.

Given that the federal government's existing affordability programs are creating so-called affordable units costing $2,000 a month in Montreal, does my colleague agree that this makes absolutely no sense? Should the federal government not be investing more in social housing?

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Madam Speaker, I completely agree with my colleague.

I want to thank the member for the conversations we have had and for his shared advocacy.

We need far more significant investment into a mix of community, public and co-op housing across the country. We know this has been done in the past. Back in the early eighties, I believe around 8% of newly constructed rental units were co-op housing, whereas now we are down to less than 1%. Therefore, we have that example of when the federal government stepped up to the pace and scale required. I look forward to working with the member and others in the House to move back toward the scale and pace we had in the past.

[Laurel Collins, NDP, Victoria, BC]

Madam Speaker, I want to thank the member for his speech and for sharing our desire to quickly address the mistake the government made. It knew about this back in May of 2021, and seniors have suffered because of the delay. I also thank him for his comments on how seniors need supports more broadly and his support for the member for Winnipeg Centre's bill on a guaranteed basic income.

Seniors are living in poverty. Could the member speak to what a guaranteed basic income would mean for the residents in his riding?