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.

Motion That Debate Be Not Further Adjourned

[Julie Vignola, Bloc, Beauport—Limoilou, QC]

Madam Speaker, no one is disputing the urgency of passing Bill C-12. Everyone across party lines has been warning the government about the plight of seniors since 2021, so the need for the bill is well known.

Two weeks ago, we were told that the bill could not be pushed forward and that its measures could not be implemented before July because of IT problems. Now we are hearing that some people may be reimbursed, or at least get some help, as early as April.

Nevertheless, the use of this closure motion hurts. We all would have agreed to proceed quickly, without the gag order, and the bill would have passed quickly.

Why shut down the democratic process and discussions that were going very well?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I think the hon. member answered her own question.

It is about moving forward quickly to make sure that seniors have security and surety moving forward. We have been very clear and transparent with members in the House on this matter. I appeared before the committee yesterday, along with my officials, and laid out why this bill needs to be passed in the upcoming weeks to make sure we get the best outcome for seniors.

We, of course, began working extremely hard and very quickly on this issue as soon as I was appointed. Officials have made huge strides to solve these financial challenges for seniors in an evidenced way. We cannot risk not delivering for seniors by playing politics, and I really hope that we can put that aside and move forward very quickly to ensure that the most vulnerable seniors have support.

[Peter Julian, NDP, New Westminster—Burnaby, BC]

Madam Speaker, in this corner of the House, we see NDP MPs as the effective opposition. We pushed for Bill C-12, and certainly support these absolutely important measures that need to be put in place, but that is not sufficient in itself.

Before the vote, I would like the minister to confirm that the government has accepted two key NDP demands: first, that the clawback is completely repaid to the nearly 200,000 Canadian seniors who need it by mid-April; and second, that the government is putting into place an emergency lane for seniors who are in great difficulty, so that by mid-March they would get a lump sum payment that would allow them to pay their rent until we get to the full reimbursement in mid-April.

Can the minister confirm that the government has accepted those two key and important NDP demands on behalf of Canadian seniors?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to thank the NPD, but indeed all members who have raised this issue and who have spoken to me directly. This is a real opportunity for all of us to show Canadians how a minority Parliament can actually work.

There are a lot of things we can disagree on in the House that are fundamental issues. This is something we all agree on, including the urgency to get this out soon as possible. When I was appointed, we worked with officials and the Minister of Finance to put in a major investment and to move very quickly.

As the hon. member very well knows, we are making this major investment through a one-time payment to seniors whose benefits were affected in 2020. I also shared yesterday with the hon. member that we would be delivering ahead of schedule and as soon as possible, on April 19. Service Canada would be working with members of Parliament to help constituents who are in dire need to get that support even sooner, in March.

Bill C-12 focuses on making sure this issue does not occur again, and I hope all members will move very quickly to make sure we put this in place so seniors are not impacted this year.

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. minister for her work on this file and the agreement in the House of Commons. I would be remiss if I did not acknowledge the fact that we are only here today debating a motion of closure because the government screwed up. It is because the government did not allow for the due process of committee. We rushed through legislation, and now we have to make up for the mistakes of the government to protect seniors.

Will the member acknowledge that we are here today because the government screwed up and tried to do too much too quickly, while restraining the rights and duties of parliamentarians to effectively review parliamentary legislation in a parliamentary committee?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, unlike the party opposite, let me remind the hon. member we moved very quickly on providing support for seniors, students, workers and businesses during this unprecedented time that called for unprecedented measures to be put in place. We of course moved very quickly to ensure Canadians had the support they needed at that time.

I also remind the hon. member that, from the very beginning, our party has always meant to support those most vulnerable seniors. We worked extremely hard to strengthen income security for seniors, including with the guaranteed income supplement, which has helped over 900,000 low-income seniors. Let me also remind the hon. member we restored the age of eligibility for seniors to 65, which the Conservatives wanted to move to 67.

On this side of the House, we are going to continue to make sure we support seniors, and that is exactly what Bill C-12 would be doing. I really hope we can put aside our partisanship and move quickly to move this forward.

[Claude DeBellefeuille, Bloc, Salaberry—Suroît, QC]

Madam Speaker, I am a little stunned to hear the minister admit so freely that she made a deal with the third party in opposition to adopt this closure motion on Bill C-12. In exchange, the government will move up payments to seniors who have been unfairly ripped off and had their GIS payments reduced.

Is the minister now telling us that if there had been no deal, if the third party of opposition had stayed true to its roots and refused to support the gag order, she would not have moved up the payments?

Did she use vulnerable seniors' incomes as a bargaining chip?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, from the very beginning, we have been moving very quickly on this issue. As the member very well knows, since I was appointed to this role we have worked extremely hard with officials and the Minister of Finance to put a major investment in the fiscal update. Of course, we are moving very quickly to ensure seniors have all the support they need.

Let me also remind the hon. member that Bill C-12 is about ensuring that this does not happen again. I worked with the Bloc critic to ensure we moved this quickly. Its members all agreed with this, and I really hope we can move to ensure that seniors have support going forward.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

Madam Speaker, it really concerns me that the minister is talking about how quickly the Liberals got this done. I just want to give a shout-out to my colleague for North Island—Powell River, and all the work she did in pushing the government to speed up. I know that it actually has not gone quickly and, in fact, we know that the impact of the clawbacks on poor working seniors has been devastating.

I know seniors in my riding who literally lost their homes and went from income supplements of $600 to $60. They were also supporting their kids. Not only did our party push for justice for seniors, we also continue to push for a guaranteed livable income for seniors.

Where is the government on that? Why are we not providing seniors with what they need to thrive, not just survive? It is not even enough to survive.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, our government's priority has always been to be there to support those most vulnerable seniors. Let me remind the hon. member that one of the very first things that we did as a government was to restore the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS to 65. We then moved forward and actually increased the guaranteed income supplement. That has helped over 900,000 low-income single seniors. That has actually lifted 45,000 seniors out of poverty.

Of course we have an ambitious agenda for seniors. As the hon. member may know, it is in my mandate letter to make sure that we continue to move forward.

This summer, we are going to be increasing the OAS for those 75 and older by 10%. In my mandate letter, I have a commitment to increase the guaranteed income supplement by $500 for single seniors and $750 for couples. We have an ambitious agenda, and I really hope we can work together, if that is what we are talking about. I think we have a real opportunity to do just that, and I hope we can move forward to make sure that those seniors have the supports they need.

[Stéphane Lauzon, Liberal, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Rural Economic Development]

Madam Speaker, it is rather ironic to hear the Conservatives lecture us today about not going fast enough, when they were the ones who raised the age of eligibility from 65 to 67.

I would like to hear the Minister of Seniors talk about the importance of collaboration among all parties in the House to provide help and support and send a clear message to seniors. Let us support our seniors and act quickly.

Can the Minister of Seniors help us provide this collaboration of the House of Commons?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, let me thank my hon. colleague for the excellent work he did when he was the parliamentary secretary to the minister of seniors in the previous mandate. He certainly has done quite a lot of work. As the hon. member rightfully said, I think this a real opportunity for all of us to work together to ensure that seniors are supported.

The hon. member will know that I have had conversations with all different parties to ensure that we can move quickly on this. They all agree with the fact that this is a very simple and quick, but significant, fix to ensure seniors have that security and that surety.

I really hope we can put aside our partisanship for this, and move forward to help those seniors.

[Brad Redekopp, Conservative, Saskatoon West, SK]

Madam Speaker, I just want to remind the minister that it is the official opposition, the Conservatives, who have been calling for this for many months. It was even in our election platform. Even the government's coalition partner, the NDP, has been asking for this, too.

I heard just a few moments ago the minister and the parliamentary secretary both talking about how, when they were first appointed, they started working very hard, which I believe implies that the previous minister was not working hard and was not doing as much as they should have.

I just wonder if the minister could comment on some of the mistakes that were made by the previous minister. What things is she doing to correct them?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Madam Speaker, I always find it rich when I hear the Conservative opposition members talk about this. It was actually their government that wanted to increase the age of retirement to 67. One of the very first things we did as a government was to restore that age back to 65. We moved very quickly on enhancing the guaranteed income supplement, which they, by the way—

[Brad Vis, Conservative, Mission—Matsqui—Fraser Canyon, BC]

Madam Speaker, on a point of order, we are debating in the House the closure of a bill. We are debating whether we are going to move forward with this legislation or not, yet the minister, in all of her responses, continually refers to a policy decision made over six years—