Human Resources Committee on Oct. 28th, 2010

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

That's precisely the point of the correspondence there.

I know we've heard from Sharon Rosenfeldt, whose life has been forever changed by Clifford Olson after he murdered her son. I can't imagine how she must have felt, knowing that he was also receiving old age security and other benefits.

You had mentioned that David Toner, president of Families Against Crime and Trauma, was in support of this legislation. He said, “We're thrilled that the Prime Minister and Minister have taken leadership and are putting victims ahead of entitlements of prisoners”.

I know Mr. Comartin was saying, “What about the prisoner, and what about having funds available for them?” I think David Toner captures that as well. This is the issue of the victims as opposed to just entitlements to prisoners.

Would you comment on that?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We have brought in a lot of programs to assist victims and their families, through the ombudsman, the funds--there's a long list of investments we're making to help support and protect the victims.

When it comes to the criminals, they are in prison because they have broken our laws. They have violated our standards of what is decent living in Canada, so they're in prison. They're there to pay their debt to society. We believe they should not be getting paid by society as well.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

That's a fair point.

I have a quote from the Vancouver police chief, Jim Chu. In his news release of June 2, 2010, he said, “It would be my hope that innocent victims will no longer feel further victimized by watching their attackers receive Old Age pension during their forced retirement from their careers of crime”. That also addresses that.

Many have expressed a concern about the spouses of prisoners and whether they are going to suffer because of this legislation. Perhaps you could comment on that and how that concern can be addressed administratively.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

We don't believe the innocent spouses or common law partners of convicted criminals should suffer financially because of the deeds. These individuals are innocent. They would retain any entitlement to the old age security benefits, to the guaranteed income supplement, or even to the allowance, but they would do so not based on the couple's income but on their own individual income. So what we'd make sure of is that the spouses, the common law partners, of convicted criminals would retain their entitlement. They still would receive their old age security benefits and their guaranteed income supplement benefits. They shouldn't be victimized by the deeds of their spouses.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

A fair point. I note that there's always an issue of constitutionality raised by--at least Mr. Comartin does. Just to be clear, the old age security and GIS entitlements of prisoners are not taken away forever. They are simply suspended during the time they are incarcerated, paying their debt to society. You might want to comment on that.

Are we the only country that is doing what we're doing in this bill, or might there be others?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

It is something that is fundamental to your belief system. If someone is paying their debt to society, should you be paying them on top?

Right here, within Canada, without having to even look abroad, eight of our provinces and territories already deny social assurance, social security benefits and such to incarcerated prisoners within their provincial and territorial judicial systems. If we look further abroad, to the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, they all have similar provisions at the national level. They too believe that society should not be supporting individuals by providing for their basic needs in terms of housing, shelter, and food, and then paying them on top of that through an old age security system that is designed to help those who are in need and who are looking to achieve a certain standard of living in their golden years. These are people who have contributed to our country; they have been law-abiding citizens. Yes, we're there to support them, but those who have violated our code of standards and have been convicted of that, no, we don't think so. Several other countries agree with us, as do most of the provinces and territories.

[Ed Komarnicki, Conservative, Souris—Moose Mountain, SK]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you.

We will begin our second round of questions. This will be a five-minute round, and I do realize, Minister, that you need to go at about a quarter to the hour.

We'll begin, for five minutes, with Madam Minna, please.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

I'll be sharing some of my time with Madam Folco, if I may.

Minister, I just have one question, very briefly. I had this discussion with the officials when they were here. My question is, when your department or a manager of your department was involved--and as you are the minister responsible for old age security, and for families actually, this works really well--did your department ask for information on the inmates? In other words, how many were there? How many were married? How many of them would have had dependent children or other dependants beside spouses?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

Until we sign work-sharing agreements with the provinces, we have no idea of knowing even exactly how many prisoners there are. We do have an estimate of about 600 who would be affected by this. We certainly don't know any of the details, and in drafting the bill from the federal perspective, we do not have that information at this point in time, no. I would expect however, given the fact that you have to be 65 years old to qualify for old age security, that there wouldn't be a whole lot of cases where there would be a dependent minor.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

The reality, though, Madam Minister, is that there are people who have children, maybe in their teens, when they are 65 who are still in university or school, or others who might be dependent. I just find it rather odd, to say the least, that a department that is responsible for families would not have that information or make sure they had the information. There have been months while the bill was being drafted. At least the information on the 400 who are apparently in our federal system could have been collected. I've asked for that to be done of the officials who were here before.

I would advise that we do this, because there could be unintended consequences that the bill would have. I'm not saying...obviously, the bill is moving forward, and we are supporting it, but we also want to make sure that, as you said in your own remarks, people who are innocent are not in any way affected negatively because of something we're doing. I would hope that information would be looked at as quickly as possible. Then I don't know what we do with this, since the bill will have passed by the time the information is gathered.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

There are a number of programs, as I believe you're aware, that do address the needs of dependent minors, and they're income tested, so that if the family income does drop, they become eligible for a lot more benefits.

A simple example would be the Canada student grants program, which is income geared to assist students by providing grants to them, monthly grants, for post-secondary education, which go up as the family income goes down. These are grants so that these students aren't incurring debt.

[Maria Minna, Liberal, Beaches—East York, ON]

I'm talking about people who may not be in university. I am talking about dependent children. It's not just a matter of pension; it's a matter of day-to-day survival.

I'll just let my colleague go on, because otherwise we won't be able to get her in.

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

How much time do I have, Madam Chair?

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

[Inaudible--Editor]

[Raymonde Folco, Liberal, Laval—Les Îles, QC]

Okay.

This is something that affects not only students, as you mentioned, but also disabled children. A disabled child might be dependent on his parents and the person serving the prison sentence. He might remain dependent his whole life, in some cases.

When I put this question to Correctional Service officials two days ago, they replied that they had no information about the number of inmates or which inmates had dependents. The next step is to ask the minister responsible why that is the case. If there really is a valid reason, I would strongly suggest—Ms. Minna and I discussed this previously—that this question be put directly to the person who is to be incarcerated, whatever the reason for his or her incarceration, so that we have access to that information.

We already have access to information regarding whether the inmate has a spouse. Why not have access to information about dependents?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

I think we're mixing different issues here.

We obviously are concerned about dependent children, whether they're in university, as Ms. Minna originally suggested, which is why I cited the Canada student grants program.... But we do have a broad range of programs to assist low-income families who have dependent children, whether it's through the child disability benefit, the learning bonds, or the education savings grant. There are numerous programs that do exist already for families of lesser income.

This bill is about a principle of benefits to seniors. It is supposed to provide the necessities of life, ensure that seniors themselves have it. It's not about their children; it's about seniors, and these are the people whom it's intended to support.

In the case of prisoners, they're already receiving those benefits, courtesy of the hard-working taxpayers of Canada. That's what it's about.

I would suggest that if an individual were that concerned about their family and their family's welfare, they shouldn't be getting themselves into a situation where they're in prison in the first place.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Thank you very much.

We will now go to Mr. Vellacott, please.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

To the minister, thanks for being here.

I guess you did, in the course of the previous remarks here, and just recently in fact to the member opposite, speak about the purpose of old age security and the guaranteed income supplement, so I ask rather directly and to the point just a couple of quick questions on that.

Is the rehabilitation of criminals one of the purposes of the OAS? I mean that sincerely. And is the purpose of OAS to be a savings plan for prisoners?

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

In a nutshell, absolutely not.

Old age security was designed to help seniors, those people who built our great country, ensure that they have a certain standard of living in their golden years. It's there to make sure that they have a place to live, that they can afford that, and that they can afford to put food on the table for themselves. It's to take care of their immediate benefits.

It was never designed as a savings plan. It is income tested. Once individuals reach certain plateaus, then the amount of OAS they receive is reduced, because they obviously have the ability to meet those basic needs of food and shelter.

Prisoners are likewise already receiving those benefits, courtesy of the taxpayers.

So, no, it was never intended as a savings plan. It was never intended as a rehabilitation program. Its sole purpose in law is to support the needs of our seniors, to make sure they have an adequate living level.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Right. To summarize, then, we have other programs in place to rehabilitate criminals, through Corrections Canada. They have their specific programs for that, but clearly the OAS is not meant for the rehabilitation of criminals.

[Diane Finley, Conservative, Haldimand—Norfolk, ON]

You're absolutely right. There are a number of programs, both federal-provincial and through NGO levels, to assist prisoners with rehabilitation and indeed with re-integration into society once they're released.

[Maurice Vellacott, Conservative, Saskatoon—Wanuskewin, SK]

Thank you.

I'm done with my questions. I'm passing off here.

[The Chair, Conservative, Candice Bergen]

Mr. Watson.

[Jeff Watson, Conservative, Essex, ON]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Minister, thank you for being here. Something interesting has been developing. I don't know if you've been following the hearings on this particular bill to this point, but off the camera, the opposition members have been arguing almost exclusively with their time in favour of prisoners being able to bank their OAS. Interestingly enough, when the cameras are on and Canadians are watching, they're not lining their questions up that way or they're doing it in a much more subtle way.