Can you repeat the question? Sorry.
Evidence of meeting #61 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transfer.
A recording is available from Parliament.
Evidence of meeting #61 for Finance in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was transfer.
A recording is available from Parliament.
7:55 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
Can you repeat the question? Sorry.
7:55 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Well, it appears to me that since it's not coming into play for 19 years, the people who would have to increase payments would be the people who are actually going to receive benefits from it. It would have to be a tax increase today, in my mind, to—
7:55 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
Yes, OAS is funded from general revenue. Therefore, if the costs increase, the government has to find revenues to pay for these costs.
7:55 p.m.
Conservative
Brian Jean Conservative Fort McMurray—Athabasca, AB
Then taxes have to go up. That's ultimately it. The taxes would have to go up for the people who are actually working today. I just wanted to be clear on that. It's not coming in for 19 years, so the only people who are going to be affected are—
7:55 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
It will not be until 2029.
7:55 p.m.
Conservative
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The nominal dollar figure, the 2030 figure, is actually not as pertinent to this discussion as the percentage-of-GDP figure. In terms of affordability, as GDP grows government revenues grow, roughly commensurate with GDP growth. Would you agree with that?
7:55 p.m.
Director, Task Force, Special Projects, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development
The chief actuary, when he produces his report, does everything in nominal dollars.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
If GDP grows and the tax base remains roughly the same in terms of the tax structure, does government revenue grow commensurately?
7:55 p.m.
Director General, Seniors and Pensions Policy Secretariat, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development
We're not tax experts.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Okay.
The percentage-of-GDP number you eventually provided to us, the 3.1% of GDP in 2030, you're saying is unaffordable and unsustainable at that point. What is the shortfall?
7:55 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
I guess what we can say is that this—
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
7:55 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
—increase in GDP was a factor. That's what the government announced in making this decision. No?
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
What is the shortfall at 2030? What is the shortfall you project? What is the reason this program is unsustainable? There has to be a dollar figure.
I've actually been a minister. If you came to me and said, “Minister, we have a real problem with this demographic issue. It didn't exist in the last election. It's just popped up, and we have to do something very urgently from a public policy perspective”, I would ask you what the dollar figure was. What was the shortfall?
If you came back to me and said, “Actually, the number of workers is going to be fewer and the number of retirees is going to be more”, I'd say that this isn't a dollar figure.
7:55 p.m.
Director General, Seniors and Pensions Policy Secretariat, Department of Human Resources and Skills Development
No, you're right, but these are all factors.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
If you just gave me a nominal figure, I'd say that it's not a percentage-of-GDP figure. What is the dollar figure for what you have to save by 2030 to make it sustainable? How unsustainable is it at 2030?
7:55 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
It gets to the same question, on which I've said that I have no further comments.
7:55 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
I'm going to go back to the good old days, when I was a minister and I could ask these questions of public servants. I was a very nice minister to my public servants, but I would ask difficult questions from time to time. The kind of question I would then ask is whether this change, from age 65 to 67, addresses it, and it's now sustainable. You're saying that....
8 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
I cannot tell you what I have told or what my department has told the minister. I can talk about what the government has announced.
8 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
I'd just remind you that we've heard from public servants from a variety of departments here tonight. In every case, we asked them what the effect on the fisc was, and they were able to tell us. You're the only—
8 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
In this case, it's a long-term projection.
8 p.m.
Liberal
Scott Brison Liberal Kings—Hants, NS
Okay. That has an impact on the fisc and is pertinent to our discussions.
You're saying that it's not sustainable now, because there's a shortfall, but you won't tell us what the shortfall is.
8 p.m.
Chief, Social policy, Income Security, Department of Finance
What I'm saying is that the Minister of Finance has already addressed this question, and I don't have any further comments on that.
