It's the first time you've been on this committee, at least while I've been here, so it's nice to have your question.
This has been a really important issue for generations of governments, as we think about how we deal with the reality of an aging population. Increasingly, with people spending more years in retirement, that's a challenge. If, unfortunately, one spouse dies, the other one can be left alone for a long period of time. I understand the question.
We've certainly been working to try to improve outcomes for seniors since day one, so the increase in the guaranteed income supplement was critically important. That helped tens of thousands of seniors. The decision to make sure that people could retire at age 65 was important, especially for lower- and middle-income seniors, who often are in a situation where they can't necessarily work more years. We have done a number of things.
I've heard the survivor's benefit is an issue. Of course, as we think about making changes, we need to work together with provinces. I think what you were referring to goes through the Canada pension plan, and the governance of the Canada pension plan is the Government of Canada but also the provinces, so it's on the agenda of that group.
The ministers of finance, who are the stewards of the Canada pension plan, get together once for sure, normally twice, per year, and we have discussions about how we can ensure both that the plan is funded appropriately and that it meets the objectives we're trying to achieve. The survivors' benefit is one of those objectives, and making sure it's up-to-date with the changes we are going through in longevity is important.
It's a continuing discussion. I'm an advocate for making sure the system works, and we'll take back your point of view to that group.