Finance Committee on May 17th, 2021

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Thank you very much, Ms. McCormick.

Are there any questions from members on division 29? It's pretty straightforward.

Thank you.

We will start into division 30, student loans and apprentice loans.

Mr. Rahman.

[Atiq Rahman, Assistant Deputy Minister, Learning Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will make it very short.

I am the assistant deputy minister of the learning branch at Employment and Social Development Canada.

Division 30 proposes to waive interest accrual on Canada student loans and Canada apprentice loans for two years between April 1, 2021 and March 31, 2023. No interest will accrue during this period, ensuring that borrowers facing financial impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic can better manage their student debt as the economy recovers.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will be happy to take questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Are there any questions on division 30, student loans and apprentice loans?

Seeing none, I thank you very much, Mr. Rahman.

Let's go to division 32, which is increased old age security pension and payment.

[Kristen Underwood, Director General, Income Security and Social Development Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'm Kristen Underwood. I'm a director general in the income security and social development branch of ESDC. I'm here with my colleague Kevin Wagdin, who is a director in the income security and social development branch.

Just quickly, the government is proposing to increase the OAS pension by 10% for seniors 75 and older. As seniors get older, they tend to have lower incomes and often face higher health-related expenses because of the onset of illness or disability. This vulnerability is further compounded by a reduced ability to supplement income with paid work, by the risk of outliving savings, and the risk of becoming a widow or widower as people age.

With this measure, the government is addressing the financial vulnerability that seniors face as they age. It will take place in two parts. Subject to parliamentary approval, the first part will be a taxable one-time payment of $500 in August 2021 to meet the immediate needs of OAS pensioners who are 75 years or older as of June 2022; secondly, a 10% permanent increase will be made to the monthly OAS pension for seniors 75 and older beginning in July 2022.

This change will strengthen the financial security of 3.3 million seniors, 56% of whom are women, and changes to the Old Age Security Act will be made to exempt the one-time payment from the definition of income for the guaranteed income supplement.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm happy to take questions.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Mr. Julian, please go ahead.

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

Did the department do any sort of legal analysis around the discrimination against those who are on CPP and OAS who are under 75? There's been understandably a lot of outrage, not around the increase but around the increase only applying to those over 75.

To what extent did the department do an evaluation around potential legal challenges around that discrimination, leaving those 65 to 75 out and not providing supports that are necessary? There's no doubt that there needs to be an increase, but it's from 75 and over.

[Kristen Underwood]

I think the change is focused on those 75 years and older because of the risk as people get older. I talked about the lower income they often face, the higher health-related expenses and the onset of illness and disability. These risks are there, and people are at greater risk as they get older. That's why the benefit is focused at those 75 years and older.

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

I thank you for that, but that doesn't actually answer my question. My question is, was there a legal analysis done?

[Kristen Underwood]

Kevin, do you want to take that?

[Kevin Wagdin, Director, Seniors and Pensions Policy Secretariat, Income Security and Social Development Branch, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Yes, I can say that legal analyses are done as part of all of the proposals that are put forward, but our focus was on the policy rationale, as Kristen mentioned, the idea that there was a policy evidence to suggest that folks who are 75 years and older were experiencing different financial circumstances than those who were 65 to 74.

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

Will you share that legal analysis with us?

[Kristen Underwood]

Mr. Chair, I don't think it's normal practice to share legal analysis from internal....

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

That's normally the policy.

Go ahead, Mr. Julian.

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

I think the committee members would like to have that information. You can see some nodding heads as well, so we're requesting it.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Ms. Underwood, on that question, if you could get back to us on what you could provide, that would be helpful.

I'll take Mr. Fast, and then we are going to have to close. If there are other questions, we'll have to bring the witnesses back.

Mr. Fast.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Ms. Underwood, you said those over aged 75 are experiencing different challenges than those under 75. I'm assuming you've done a full analysis of that, which you can share with us?

[Kristen Underwood]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Yes we did do some analysis looking at levels of employment of seniors who are over 75 compared to those under 75. A number of other—

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Levels of employment for those over 75, and persons under 75?

[Kristen Underwood]

Yes, levels of employment, percentage with disability, percentages of severe disabilities, number who were women, number who were widowed, percentage of pensioners with OAS or lower incomes. We can provide that.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

Could you provide us with that analysis through the chair?

Finally, who made the actual decision to cut it off at 75? It could have been 76, it could have been 64. Somebody made a decision. Was it someone in the civil service? Was it someone within the political family? Who made that decision?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I don't think that's a question that the public service can answer.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

With respect, Mr. Chair, if in fact it was someone in the public service, she could answer that question.

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

Yes, if it was, but if I recall correctly, it was in the platform of the governing party.

[Ed Fast, Conservative, Abbotsford, BC]

It was a political decision that was made, and then it was backed up afterwards by analysis? Putting the cart before the horse, is that what happened?

[The Chair, Liberal, Wayne Easter]

I've never seen that happen in politics.

Do you have anything to add, Ms. Underwood, or your colleague, Mr. Wagdin?

Are there any more questions on this division?

Ms. Underwood, you can provide us certain information, and you're going to look into the legal aspect to see what you can and can't provide.

We still have divisions 34, 35 and 36. We'll have to invite those witnesses back. We'll have to find time to do that somehow over the next week.

Thank you to all who presented today, provided your evidence and answered our questions.

With that, we will have to adjourn, because I know that other members are already late for other commitments.

Thank you.

This meeting is adjourned.