Thank you for that information. We were very frustrated because we knew that you had it. This is a very concrete example of the government's lack of transparency. The Parliamentary Budget Officer has said that such a lack of transparency is unacceptable. Unfortunately, you provided a typical example of the way in which this government works. This is not a personal attack, and I thank you for providing us with the figure, because it is now on the record.
Mr. Van Kesteren often brings up the studies done by the OECD and the World Bank. I have a lot of respect for him and I know that he knows that the report deals with countries in general. Mr. Van Kesteren always says “in general”, but the Government of Canada asked the OECD to confirm that it applies specifically to Canada. Here is what the OECD concluded:
The analysis suggests that Canada does not face major challenges of financial sustainability with its public pension schemes.
There is no pressing financial or fiscal need to increase pension ages in the foreseeable future.
I'd invite you to look at the study and the report that is actually with the Department of Finance. It talks about OAS and GIS, and that there is no pressure; it is sustainable. When we have the number, which is $1.8 billion in 2030, I'm not sure why the government is saying it's not sustainable and it's the end of the world.
Again, it's a question of choice. Clearly the government has made the choice that people living in poverty, especially the elderly, will have to work harder.
We've seen it from a lot of witnesses. We've seen how that will affect people and how bad it is, and how it affects the elderly and the poorest people. Basically, we're talking about the....
We are talking about the segment of the population that is most affected by this measure, that is the most vulnerable. It is a choice the government has made. I am happy that at least now we have the figures and that we can clearly see the government's decision and approach. It does things in secret and has to have its arm twisted before it provides any figures. It should have reacted, because the attack on Mr. Rodrigue was a little too much. The government looked quite bad: we knew that it knew the figures and that it was intentionally concealing them.