Yes, and you've already said that. But the fact remains that it has its own pool of revenue and it is actuarially sound for at least 75 years.
It's an investment fund, so it's very different. When we say it's fully funded, it's because it is actuarially sound. An interpretation of the words is what I'm suggesting. I just want to make sure we clarify it so that you understand exactly what's meant by the term that was used.
Mr. Nikias, you had some questions about CPP. I want to take advantage of this opportunity to share the answer with you.
I have only five minutes, and it will be quicker for me to read what's been said about it than to improvise. So if you'll allow me, I'll read it. How will the CPP and other federal programs be affected by the age of eligibility increase?
The Government will ensure that certain federal programs, including programs provided by Veterans Affairs Canada and Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada that currently provide income support benefits until age 65, are aligned with changes to the OAS program. Without such an alignment, individuals receiving benefits from these programs would stop receiving them at age 65 and face an income gap until age 67 when they become eligible for the OAS pension and the GIS.
Which is what you said, Mr. Nikias.
...alignment will ensure that these individuals do not face a gap in income at ages 65 and 66. The Government will also discuss the impact of the changes to the OAS program on [CPP] disability and survivor benefits with provinces and territories, who are joint stewards of the CPP, in the course of the next triennial review.
The reason I tell you this is that I want to reassure you that the work isn't finished, but we do have partners in this, the provinces and the territories.
I do want to ask you about proactive enrolment, though, and how that might help our disabled folks. Do you see the proactive enrolment into OAS as a good measure for our disabled Canadians?