Maurice Dumas

[Charitable And Non-Profit Organization Director Remuneration Disclosure Act, March 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, before speaking on Bill C-224, I would like to take this opportunity to mark St. Patrick's Day and wish all our Irish friends a very happy St. Patrick's Day. I would also like to call your attention to Claude Bourguignon's excellent article published in La Presse today on this subject.

Mr. Bourguignon is a resident of my riding of Argenteuil-Papineau. In his paper, he relates the history of the massive presence of thousands of Irish Canadians from coast to coast. Claude Bourguignon is also one of the founders of the Irish Quebecers interpretation centre, located in Saint-Colomban, in the riding of Argenteuil-Papineau.

The principle of Bill C-224, the Charitable and Non-profit Organization Director Remuneration Disclosure Act, introduced by the hon. member for Hamilton-Wentworth is to force non-profit organizations and charitable organizations that receives, directly or indirectly, any assistance from the public funds of Canada to disclose the remuneration and benefits paid to their directors and senior officers.

This means that the remuneration and benefits received by the directors and senior officers of charitable organizations would be disclosed upon receipt of federal government or public funds. This way, Canadians would have the assurance that public funds do not go to the directors and senior officers.

Because it is all too often perceived as a charitable activity carried out on an individual basis and in isolation, volunteer work is overlooked in our political debates on the Canadian economy. However, individual volunteers' efforts are far from negligible given their economic impact. There is an obvious need to promote volunteerism. This essential element of society is also a lifestyle and a social duty.

Yet, in recessionary times, volunteer organizations will have to use other financing methods because government assistance is getting increasingly restricted. It must also be noted that the survival of those services and programs people rely on is not guaranteed.

The old stereotypes concerning volunteers, their activities and their motivation are no longer valid. Today, two thirds of volunteers in Canada belong to the paid labour force and most of them hold full time jobs.

This bill contains a few flaws, however. First of all, clause 3, line 17, reads in part as follows:

and receives, directly or indirectly

This very broad wording could refer to a great many non-profit organizations which do not feel they have anything to do with the federal government. It should simply read, "and receives directly".

Second, the next line reads in part as follows:

from the public funds of Canada

The expression "public funds of Canada" is very ambiguous because it does not specify if these funds are strictly federal or if they include provincial and municipal funds.

The main purpose of this bill is to avoid any possibility of fraud by directors and senior officers of non-profit organizations.

All Canadians and Quebecers alike recognize that volunteerism is a great blessing to society. According to Statistics Canada, in 1987, Canada benefited from the work of over 9 million unpaid volunteers. Their work represented over one billion hours, or an average of two hours per week per job from November 1986 to October 1987, or more than 500,000 full-time jobs for a year.

The three main sectors relying on volunteer work are religious organizations, sports and recreation, as well as education and youth development.

Close to one quarter of male volunteer workers are involved in recreational endeavours, while another quarter participates in religious and educational activities. Women are more likely to do volunteer work with religious organizations, with one fifth of them in that sector.

Overall, 38 per cent of the volunteer work is related to the collection of funds, 36 per cent to the provision of information, and 35 per cent to the organization, monitoring or co-ordination of activities.

It is surprising to see that most volunteers are not older or retired people. Close to half of them are in the 25-44 age group; a little over a quarter are in the 45-64 category, while the others are 15 to 24 year olds. Volunteers in the 25-44 age group hold close to two thirds of the jobs in education and youth development, and three fifths of the jobs in sports and recreation.

As the official opposition representative and critic for issues concerning seniors, I want to point out that volunteers aged 65 and over hold close to one fifth of the jobs related to social services, including health care and support.

Moreover, the majority of volunteers come from middle-income households. Over 40 per cent of all volunteers come from households whose income is in the $30,000 to $60,000 range, 14 per cent come from households with an income of over $60,000, while only 5 per cent come from households whose income is less than $10,000.

Volunteers with a household income of over $60,000 are found mostly in organizations with an economic or international focus, the percentages being, respectively, 19 and 21 per cent. Those with a household income of less than $20,000 are usually in social services and represent nearly one-quarter of all volunteers, which reflects the high ratio of senior citizens in this area.

At least 19 per cent of volunteers in social services are aged 65 and over.

In an article that appeared in La Presse on February 6, 1993, journalist Clause Masson discussed the use of funds collected during telethons, saying that if we consider the preparations for a telethon, the need to maintain a permanent staff and also the promotion campaign, the cost of producing this kind of show is enormous and that is where a substantial amount of money collected is spent.

And that is where the organizations that conduct these telethons will have to make some changes. For instance, there is definitely something wrong when a total of $3 million is collected and only 10 or 20 per cent is donated to the actual cause. To make a telethon worthwhile, at least 50 per cent or $1.5 million should go to direct services.

We must keep telethons from being a way for people and organizations to perpetuate the so-called charity business. Just because organizations are not for profit does not mean we should trust them implicitly.

In 1991, Quebecers gave over $400 million to a myriad of organizations appealing to their generosity, that is charities, foundations, church parishes, recreational organizations, etc. Canadians on the whole, excluding business, gave roughly ten times more, that is, some $5 billion dollars, according to the Canadian Centre for Philanthropy. Thus, on the subject of transparency, it would be interesting if the organizations receiving federal government or public assistance were required to reveal the benefits and salaries of their officers.

Canadians could then verify that public funds used to support charitable organizations do not simply go into the pockets of the people administering them. In conclusion, subject to the two points I raised earlier, we would be prepared to support the spirit of this bill.

[Air Canada, March 17th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, a while ago, Air Canada put ads in major Canadian newspapers, inviting anyone interested in a temporary or permanent position in Toronto to apply.

The ad said that ideally candidates should speak English and French as well as another language such as Japanese, Korean and Mandarin, but that Air Canada would consider applications from individuals who spoke English and one of those other languages.

Bloc members are appalled at Air Canada's move, relegating the French language to a position of secondary importance, as in fact the knowledge of English is the only qualification required for the job.

Let us not forget that, despite privatization, Air Canada remains subject to the Official Languages Act and, therefore, we demand that the provision of the act guaranteeing the respect of the French language be enforced.

[Income Tax Act, February 7th, 1995]

Mr. Speaker, if adopted, Bill C-282 would amend the Income Tax Act to remove, for taxpayers aged 65 and over and eligible to claim the disability credit, the requirement that only expenditures on goods and services required for medical reasons in excess of the lesser of 3 per cent of net income or $1614 may be used in calculating the medical expenses tax credit.

We in the Bloc Quebecois support this proposal, since all medical expenses would be fully deductible from the income of disabled seniors. This change in the system would be made by changing the definition of formula symbol "C" in subsection 118.2(1) of the Income Tax Act.

Disabled seniors have substantial medical expenses that are often higher than those of other tax filers. The 1993 national advisory council on seniors sketched the following picture of the health of seniors in Canada: About 80 per cent of seniors aged 65 and over said they were suffering from one or several chronic conditions, while only 20 per cent said their activities were restricted to the point where they required assistance in getting on with their daily lives-this according to statistics compiled in 1991.

It is clear that limited deductibility represents an enormous expense for disabled seniors, considering their many medical expenses and low incomes. These people pay taxes on amounts that may represent up to 3 per cent of their income, which is not in accordance with currently recognized tax principles.

The proposed amendment would only provide tax relief in terms of expenses actually incurred. It would not change the provisions on production of receipts, which are already included in the Income Tax Act. The 1993 national advisory council on seniors also described the health problems of seniors, saying that seniors aged 65 and over were twice as likely as the rest of the population to report respiratory problems, arthritis and hypertension, and three times as likely to report cardiovascular problems.

Among seniors, the percentage of mentally or physically disabled in 1987 was 47 per cent for women and 44 per cent for men. These ratios, together with the rate of multiple disabilities, tend to increase with age. During the 1991 tax year, the latest year for which data are available, 153,490 tax filers aged 65 and over claimed the disability credit.

Of this number, 91,050 had taxable income. This is the group for which the proposed amendment could represent an additional cost to the federal tax system. Of the 153,490 filers, 18,380 claimed medical expenses greater than the deduction limit.

Basically, if the amendment were passed, all these taxpayers could see their medical expense credit increase by three per cent of their net income, that is to say by the amount they used to have to subtract on their return.

On the other hand, this amendment affects a larger group: taxpayers with medical expenses lower than the deduction limit, often under $200, who would also be claiming the medical expense tax credit.

The approximate figure of 91,050 disabled senior citizens with a taxable income is indicative of the potential number of claimants. If you subtract those who are already claiming the medical expense credit, the total number of persons affected is 80,000.

Combined tax expenditures in terms of basic federal income tax on both groups, the old and new medical expense credit claimants, for 1991 are about $2.6 million, without the federal surtax which, if it were added on, would bring the grand total to about $2.7 million. This amendment to the Income Tax Act is needed to improve the quality of life for handicapped seniors.

A Canadian Press article published in the January 26 edition of Le Droit quotes a just released study by the national advisory council on aging as saying that Quebec seniors are the poorest in Canada and that Quebec holds the dubious record of the highest poverty rate among people aged 65 and over in Canada. According to the council, despite some improvement in their economic situation, many seniors, especially those living alone, live in poverty. The council also found that women aged 65 and over have less money than their male counterparts, a gap which increases after 75.

Old age security is still the main source of income for seniors, especially women. People aged 65 and over get over 50 per cent of their income from government programs.

The study shows that in 1992, the percentage of people making less than $15,000 increased with age, especially among women.

A Canadian Press article published in the January 21, 1995 edition of Le Droit stated that middle-class workers would not be able to spend their old age in comfort and that, according to the Canadian institute of actuaries, taxing RRSPs would have disastrous consequences. The institute feels that this measure would lower the savings rate in Canada and increase public

expenditures in the long term, when the baby boom generation reaches retirement age.

In the future, the challenge for individuals and decision makers will be to balance the various sources of retirement income, so as to ensure that private and public retirement funds, along with personal savings, will be such that the largest possible number of Canadians and Quebecers can enjoy an adequate standard of living in their retirement years.

It is essential for the government to realize that it must not cut into social programs and thus reduce the quality of life of our seniors. Rather, it must cut into the family trusts of rich Canadian families, since assets held in these trusts are not subject to capital gains tax for several years.

These trusts allow rich families to protect part of their family assets from generation to generation. Family trusts, which were introduced in 1972 by the Trudeau government, required a deemed disposal of assets in trust after 21 years, that is in 1993 for trusts set up before 1973.

The Bloc Quebecois has nothing against family trusts; however, it does object to their use as tax loopholes. For example, the Bloc is against the deferral, to the next generation, of the tax payable on capital gains. We also ask the government to release the figures on the value of assets held in family trusts and on the loss of tax revenue resulting from the deferral of the tax payable on capital gains.

The Income Tax Act should also be amended to prevent Canadian companies with subsidiaries abroad from using the fiscal losses of these subsidiaries to reduce their taxable income in Canada.

Bill C-282 is an act to amend the Income Tax Act so as to eliminate, for taxpayers aged 65 and over who are eligible to the credit for disability, the applicable reserve. This bill is acceptable, since disabled senior citizens are often among the poorest people in our society.

As spokesperson for Canadian associations and organizations representing seniors, I once again pledge to ensure that this social program review does not become a mere exercise to cut into programs which protect the poor, and particularly the elderly.

I have always been firmly opposed to letting the federal government reduce the deficit at the expense of our seniors, who have worked all their life and who deserve a decent standard of living.

We support this measure because all the medical costs would be deductible from the income of disabled seniors, and we feel that this amendment is essential.

[Petitions, December 8th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I have the privilege to present a petition from 649 members of social organizations called AFEAS-Associations féminines d'éducation et d'action sociale-and of golden age groups.

Whereas the elderly are usually less familiar with the technology of voice mail but still have a right to proper service, especially for their enquiries about income security, the petitioners pray and call upon Parliament and the government to give up the plan to implement voice mail for seniors.

[Michel Tremblay, December 7th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, last Saturday, the Mouvement national des Québécois et Québécoises presented one of Quebec's most noted authors, Michel Tremblay, with the 1994 Silver Medal.

A prolific writer, Michel Tremblay is one of a short list of Quebec playwrights whose works are played on all five continents.

Approximately 100 artists from Quebec paid tribute to the recipient in a skilful production directed by André Montmorency.

At the end of this magnificent evening, Mr. Tremblay impulsively, and with characteristic generosity, dedicated his award to our leader, Mr. Bouchard.

Louise Laurin, the president of the movement, said that the tribute being paid to Michel Tremblay that evening was in recognition of the generous contribution of the author to the development and dissemination of our culture. Thank you, Michel Tremblay.

[Petitions, December 6th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, I am pleased to table 586 signatures from all ridings in the province, including Saint-Maurice, the riding of the Right Hon. Prime Minister.

These petitions come from women's social action associations, better known by the acronym AFEAS, and from seniors'

groups. The petitioners ask Parliament to ask the government to give up the plan for voice mail systems for seniors. I support this petition.

[Petitions, December 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order 36, this petition comes from the Association féminine d'action sociale du Québec. It is signed by 437 petitioners.

They urge Parliament to press the government not to go ahead with its voice mail project for the elderly.

[Income Tax Act, December 2nd, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, you will understand that having just learned of the sudden and dreadful illness that has afflicted our leader, we are all, and particularly those of us who are members of the Bloc Quebecois, deeply saddened, not to say in shock. I can only hope that the Leader of the Opposition will make a speedy recovery.

The Bloc Quebecois is opposed to Bill C-59, an act to amend the Income Tax Act and the Income Tax Application Rules, because of certain measures it introduces. We are not, however, opposed to the following provisions of Bill C-59. First, the permanent renewal of the provision under which money accumulated in an RRSP can be used to finance the purchase of a first home. Second, the measure increasing the value, in many cases, of the charitable donations tax credit. The Bloc Quebecois is in agreement with this last measure, as it recognizes the contribution made by charitable donations to the well-being of the community.

At the present time, taxpayers are entitled to a tax credit equivalent to 17 per cent of the first $250 of charitable donations and a tax credit equal to 29 per cent on charitable donations over $250. The bill before us increases the total value of the tax credit for charitable donations, while lowering the threshold from $250 to $200.

The third measure that we do not object to is the one that permits a tax deduction for contributions into mine reclamation funds by businesses in the mining industry in the year in which these contributions are made. Such funds are used to cover the costs incurred when mines are shut down.

However, as a spokesperson for seniors' associations and organizations in Canada, I have undertaken to ensure that the social programs review not be reduced to simply making cuts across the board in programs designed to protect the disadvantaged, and the aged in particular.

The Bloc Quebecois denounces the fact that, over the next three years, the federal government will take half a billion dollars from seniors with this reduction in the age tax credit.

The National Advisory Council on Aging reported the following regarding the personal disposable income of the elderly: in 1989, the average income of unattached senior citizens 65 and over was $16,316, as compared to $23,080 for their counterparts under 65. An unattached senior citizen is a person who lives alone or in a household in which he or she is related to no other member of the household.

In 1992, the average income in unattached senior citizen households was $18,434, whereas that for other unattached persons was $25,039. Nearly 21 per cent, or 625,000, of Canadian senior citizens are considered as low income. The percentage of low income elderly is always higher than in the general population.

On March 9, I rose in this House and asked the Minister of Human Resources Development this question:

By making alarming statements on the old age security system, is the minister preparing to hit seniors with a considerable cut in their old age security pensions?

By way of an answer, the Minister of Human Resources Development and Minister of Western Economic Diversification simply said that he wanted to "ensure that there will be a stable, effective, fair, honest system for seniors in the future and to make sure that this country can pay for it".

Allow me to wonder about the meaning of the word "stable" used in his reply in relation to seniors, as some tax provisions in Bill C-59 create a climate of insecurity for seniors.

On September 28, I asked the Minister of Human Resources Development another question concerning programs for seniors:

Does the minister still intend to slash programs for seniors in order to finance other federal government programs?

The minister's reply was this:

Mr. Speaker, it never was our intention, it will not be our intention, la réponse est non .

The next day, September 29, I rose again in the House of Commons to say this to the Minister of Finance:

The Minister of Finance turns a deaf ear to public opinion and is using current consultations to deflect any questions. Senior citizens have often saved for years to have a decent income in their old age-

The government wants to change the rules in the middle of the game. Although the minister has been stalling for several days, he will have to make a decision. Seniors hope he will select the only fair option: no taxation of RRSPs.

Bill C-59 clearly penalizes those most in need. Seniors have worked hard all their lives. We should be grateful to them for being pioneers.

In the last budget, the federal government decided to reduce the age credit. All taxpayers aged 65 and up can apply for a tax credit equal to 17 per cent of $3,482 at the federal level and to 20 per cent of $2,200 in Quebec. This credit is non-refundable, that is, it applies to the tax payable and there can be no refund on the excess portion.

The credit reduces federal income tax by about $610 a year for all seniors who have to pay income tax. In most provinces, including Quebec, this credit also reduces provincial income tax. The combined reduction of federal and provincial income tax averages about $950; in Quebec, it is about $1,050: $610 in federal tax and $440 for Quebec.

The change made by the latest budget would reduce this credit for seniors whose net income exceeds $25,921, the current threshold for other income-dependent credits. This threshold will be indexed to the annual increase in consumer prices over 3 per cent. The credit will be reduced by 15 per cent of an individual's net income over $25,921 and will be completely eliminated when his or her income reaches $49,100.

This measure will be phased in over two years. In 1994, the reduction will be half the amount calculated and the total reduction will apply starting in 1995.

According to the finance department, this measure will affect 800,000 out of 2.6 million seniors, including 600,000 seniors whose income is between $25,921 and $49,134 and 200,000 whose income is over $49,134.

Although the finance department estimated that the credit cost the federal government $1.3 billion in 1991, the expected savings are as follows: $20 million in 1994-95, $170 million in 1995-96 and $300 million in 1996-97.

By tightening the program conditions for seniors, the government is just lowering their income and making them feel insecure.

Furthermore, the government still stubbornly insists on penalizing seniors by proposing to install voice mail systems to answer inquiries from seniors. On May 10, I asked the minister responsible for seniors about using voice mail to answer inquiries from seniors. The minister simply told us about how fast the proposed service was. I explained that many seniors were reluctant to use this type of service, as the representative of the seniors' federation said clearly on their behalf. At the beginning of the period when we present petitions, I will have several petitions to table on this subject.

On May 11, 1994, I raised the issue again by asking this question in the House:

-why does the federal government insists on attacking senior citizens, considering that most of them find it very difficult to deal with a system that is so impersonal?

The minister's response was both disarming and unacceptable. He said that the program would be more efficient and personalized, and that it would provide better service to seniors. The implementation of a centralized telephone answering system using voice mail to answer every request for information from seniors regarding government services will have a major impact on the quality of services provided to these people.

The Liberal Party was the first one to oppose cuts affecting programs for seniors. The government did not keep its promises. After targeting the age credit, cutting into old age pensions, scaring seniors with the announcement of a review of the Canada Pension Plan, the government now has the audacity to try to tax RRSPs. Every available source of income for seniors will be adversely affected and the federal government does not guarantee anything any more to people who saved money throughout their lives to have decent retirement incomes.

This fear among seniors is prevalent right across the country. I recently met with a delegation representing various associations for seniors, and I was told about their concerns regarding the government's proposed cuts to seniors' programs. I am referring more specifically to the old age pensioners' association, which was represented by its president, Mr. Grabke, its director of public relations, Mr. Ben Swankey, and its chairperson, Mrs. Marjory Kingsbury.

This association is the oldest organization in English Canada and has nearly 10,000 members in about 100 groups throughout British Columbia.

The position of the seniors in these groups was expressed as follows by their representatives.

"The position of seniors is that our generation made a lifelong contribution to building our country and we believe strongly that Canada should continue to provide a measure of security for seniors in their declining years".

On December 1, here on Parliament Hill, I also met representatives of the coalition of seniors for social equity. The association which has a membership of about 500,000 senior citizens, submitted a brief on the income of seniors: Myth or Reality. The coalition expressed the need for wide ranging consultations and planning, involving both government and seniors groups, before any changes were made in the old age security program.

Mr. André Lécuyer, a spokesman for francophone seniors, stressed that it was important to give people time to plan and adjust to changes in the system. According to Mr. Lécuyer, the public had been led to believe that the government could save more money than it does now, by cutting income security programs for seniors.

The spokesman for the coalition and president of the Federal Superannuates National Association, Mr. Claude Edwards, said during this press conference that they were not prepared to sit idle at a time when the very foundation of their superannuation plan was cracking. He said it was like buying insurance during one's working life and, upon retirement, being told by the insurance company that the policy had been cancelled and the money was no longer available. Why tax seniors?

And what about family trusts? According to some tax experts, wealthy Canadian families use family trusts as a special tax planning tool. Assets in trusts are not subject to capital gains tax for several decades, which means that these families are able to protect part of their family inheritance from one generation to the next. The family trust system introduced in 1972 by the Trudeau government, provided for the disposition of assets in trust after 21 years, which means in 1993, for instance, in the case of trusts created before 1973.

The Bloc Quebecois has nothing against the principle of family trusts but objects to their use as tax shelters. For instance, the Bloc Quebecois objects to the carrying forward of capital gains tax to the next generation. Furthermore, we want the government to reveal the figures on the value of assets and family trusts and the amount of tax revenue lost by deferring capital gains.

Why is the government so hard on the most vulnerable in our society who have worked all their lives and deserve a decent quality of life?

Bill C-59 is unacceptable in its present form because, as a result of certain measures introduced in this bill, the most vulnerable in our society will be penalized.

[Patent Act, November 25th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Health.

When she was in Winnipeg, the minister told a group of seniors that the government intends to amend the legislation on drug patents, the old Bill C-91, this in spite of the commitment made on numerous occasions by her colleague, the Minister of Industry, not to review this legislation before 1997.

Are we to understand that the minister has already made up her mind and that she intends to propose a reduction of the exclusivity period for patents when the legislation is reviewed, which should normally happen in 1997?

[National Defence, November 18th, 1994]

Mr. Speaker, why is the Minister of National Defence not launching a public inquiry which would show that the federal government is incapable of managing its large capital programs?