Human Resources Committee on May 16th, 2019

[Brigitte Sansoucy, NDP, Saint-Hyacinthe—Bagot, QC]

I apologize for interrupting you, Minister, but I would prefer to know when the sickness benefits will be increased.

Still, I would like to take the time I have left to ask you a second question, about measuring poverty.

In your strategy, you have chosen a measure that decreases the poverty rate for seniors from 14.2% to 4.9%. According to the economist Andrew Jackson, the low-income measure counted 828,000 poor seniors in 2016, while the market basket measure included only 284,000 for the same period.

In addition, you said that 40,000 seniors—I took careful note—would be entitled to the guaranteed income supplement, but would not automatically receive it yet.

You are therefore choosing a measure that, statistically speaking, reduces the number of poor seniors. However, 40,000 more seniors may be eligible for the guaranteed income supplement.

However, in Budget 2019, there is nothing about the needs of the most vulnerable, no substantial amount for social housing for refugees, no strategy for indigenous people, either urban or rural.

Why are you playing with statistics to reduce the number of poor seniors in Canada? Why are those 40,000 seniors who are entitled to the guaranteed income supplement still not receiving it automatically?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Be very brief, please. We're almost out of time.

[Jean-Yves Duclos, Liberal, Québec, QC]

My colleague Ms. Tassi will be able to answer your question better, but she will not have time to say everything in a few seconds.

In 2015, we introduced a great program for seniors. They have never received so much attention from the federal government or so many positive policy changes.

The Conservatives wanted to raise the retirement age to 67. Reducing the age to 65 again prevents 100,000 vulnerable seniors from living in poverty. This is just one example. Not to mention the increase in the guaranteed income supplement, the increase in the Canada pension plan and the national housing strategy, which will have very significant impacts on seniors. We have also increased health transfers to the provinces for home care and mental health care. Through the new horizons for seniors program, we have made investments to help seniors feel comfortable. In the last budget alone, we increased the program by 50%.

It's a shame we don't have more time. If you wish, Ms. Tassi and I would be pleased to go over with you the long list of investments we have made for seniors. That said, there will always be more to do, because seniors need the support of the Canadian government.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you.

Now we go over to MP Ruimy for about five minutes.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you very much to everybody for coming here today.

In my riding of Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, when I'm knocking on the doors, here's what I'm talking about: the game-changers of the Canada child benefit, the Canada worker benefit, the doubling of the Canada summer jobs program, the $55-billion national housing strategy, the first-ever national poverty reduction strategy, the EI compassionate care leave, the family caregiver benefits. That is just to highlight a few of the things.

What I want to focus on, Minister Tassi, is seniors. One of the things that I hear from my seniors is “What about us? What about the seniors?” In 2016, in my riding, 1,490 seniors benefited from the 2016 top-up of GIS and received an average of $740 more a year.

Through our committee work we heard more, where we could be doing more.

In budget 2016, there was a lot more for seniors. Minister Tassi. Can you break that out for us, please?

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Thank you for that question, MP Ruimy. I know you've had strong advocacy with the seniors in your riding, and I deeply appreciate that.

Before I answer your question, I want to respond to MP Sansoucy, who acknowledged a figure that I gave. For clarification, the estimated 40,000 is not OAS or GIS recipients. It's recipients who are entitled to CPP, but who are not aware of it. Most of them are women, which is why we implemented the automatic enrolment at the age of 70 in budget 2019. We're proposing that in the budget so that those seniors who are entitled to CPP but are not aware of it will actually be entitled to that benefit and receive it. That will happen through the automatic enrolment.

That also ties into MP Ruimy's question with respect to income security because that's what this is all about.

Previously we have taken measures. Our government has been working hard for seniors from the day we were elected. The OAS and GIS rollback of the age of eligibility from 67 to 65 prevented 100,000 seniors from going into poverty.

I'm glad to see that you've experienced the impacts of the GIS increase for seniors in your own riding. That's lifted 57,000 seniors out of poverty and had a positive impact on 900,000. That measure was targeted towards vulnerable single seniors, for whom we knew we had to do a little more because they were struggling to make ends meet.

We are building on that in budget 2019. In 2019, with respect to the guaranteed income supplement exemption, we've increased it from $3,500 to $5,000, then 50% of the next $10,000, and then also included seniors who are self-employed. That's a first. It's a significant step to include self-employed seniors.

I'm very happy to see that because, not only does this help with income security—which is very important amongst our seniors population—but it also helps combat the ageism piece. If seniors want to stay in the workforce, it ensures that we are encouraging them or incentivizing them to do that, not because they need to, but because they want to. We know that when seniors are part of the workforce, we all benefit.

The other area I'd like to comment on is ensuring that seniors are getting the benefits that they are entitled to. That's why we have the automatic enrolment now with the GIS and OAS. Now there's automatic enrolment in those programs. If seniors are entitled to benefits, we absolutely want them to receive those benefits. That also goes to the CPP automatic enrolment. I believe I've said that most of those 40,000 recipients that we believe are entitled but haven't applied are women. We want to continue to build to ensure that seniors are receiving the income support that they need and deserve.

[Dan Ruimy, Liberal, Pitt Meadows—Maple Ridge, BC]

Thank you very much.

I do want to point out a lot of the good work this committee has done has led to these kinds of recommendations that we've seen in our budgets and come into play and that are actually impacting the people in all of our ridings.

I'm going to pass on whatever time I have left to Mr. Hogg.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

You have 30 seconds.

[Gordie Hogg, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Minister Tassi, you made reference to the Seniors Come Share Society. You visited one in White Rock that's been in existence for 42 years. It's keeping a lot of people in their homes and surviving at home with the supports they get there. You also talked about the growth. In 27 years, 25% of our people are going to be seniors. There's a pressing need with respect to the increase of dementia. Can you talk about how those might be complemented by the works that you're doing?

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

Do I have only 10 seconds?

[Gordie Hogg, Liberal, South Surrey—White Rock, BC]

Yes.

[Filomena Tassi, Liberal, Hamilton West—Ancaster—Dundas, ON]

I had a great visit to your riding. It was fantastic to see the new horizons for seniors program at work and the amazing work that organizations in your community are doing to help provide healthy food for seniors.

The dementia strategy is something that the Minister of Health has the lead on. Although dementia is not limited to seniors, we know that over 400,000 seniors aged 65 and over are facing dementia. I've met with many seniors and their caregivers. This is a very important file. We've committed to a strategy, as you know.

In budget 2019, we've also committed $50 million to the implementation of this strategy. We look forward to this strategy being implemented. I have great respect for those caregivers who are helping their family members face this very challenging issue.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Unfortunately, that brings us to the end of our first hour. We are going to suspend briefly. I promise I will introduce those who have been at the table this whole time.

Thank you to both ministers for being here today.

We'll suspend briefly.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

We will resume.

I will take a moment to recognize all the appearing witnesses.

From the Department of Employment and Social Development, we have Mr. Graham Flack, Deputy Minister, Employment and Social Development; Leslie MacLean, Senior Associate Deputy Minister of Employment and Social Development and Chief Operating Officer of Service Canada; Mark Perlman, Chief Financial Officer and Senior Assistant Deputy Minister of Chief Financial Officer Branch; and Benoît Robidoux, Associate Deputy Minister, Employment and Social Development.

From Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, we have Evan Siddall, President and Chief Executive Officer; and Lisa Williams, Chief Financial Officer.

Welcome, and thank you all for being here today.

Mr. Sangha, for six minutes.

[Ramesh Sangha, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you very much to the officials for coming to the committee and for your valuable input.

Canadians are very happy with what the government has chosen to do. It has made a commitment to fighting poverty and is working in better ways. The reason behind that is its investments that are working, and is going to result in changes in the future too. We know we can also do much more. Can anyone explain the poverty line and the market basket measure? Can you can explain it to the committee? How does it work and how was it chosen?

[Benoît Robidoux, Associate Deputy Minister, Employment and Social Development, Department of Employment and Social Development]

In developing the poverty reduction strategy, the minister and the department consulted broadly with Canadians and experts. There are three measures of low income in Canada. One is called the low-income cut-off, which is based on how much a household spends on food compared with an average household in Canada. You need to spend 20% more than an average household to be considered low income.

There is also the low-income measure that is based on the median income of the family. If your family has an income below 50% of that median income, you are considered to be in low income. We call that a relative measure of income.

The third one that exists is the one you mentioned, the market basket measure that has existed since 2000. This one is more directed at what people think about poverty. It takes into account the basic elements people need to meet their basic needs, which we call a moderate standard of living. I can tell you what is included. It's basically four specific elements: food, clothing, transportation and shelter.

There is also another category, which accounts for about 20% of the expenses that go into the baskets. They are other necessities. The way we view it at the department is that these other necessities bring people a bit above the basic needs. We look at what people need to meet these basic needs and a bit more, and we compare that to the income that people have. In a nutshell, this is the market basket measure. In some sense, it's trying to do a relative measure that's going directly to the concept of what people need to not live in poverty.

I hope this helps. I could go into more detail, but it's kind of complicated and difficult to follow.

[Ramesh Sangha, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

It's obvious that there are significant costs to the government and to society when people live in poverty, particularly with increased spending on health care or the criminal justice system. How will the government's initiatives work effectively for Canadians?

[Graham Flack, Deputy Minister, Employment and Social Development, Department of Employment and Social Development]

Given the current state of labour shortages, I think one of the most powerful forces in changing the dynamics you just talked about is the market pull we're seeing. Employers in every part of the country are finding skill shortages and are working hard to identify individuals they might not otherwise have looked for to fill those positions. Those market forces are among the powerful factors that make government programs work better, because companies are actively seeking these individuals.

They cover a wide range of areas, and I'd put them in two buckets. One would be the programs designed to help deal with mismatches—that is, you have individuals who are trained, but maybe not for the skills employers are looking for. At our last appearance at the committee, we talked about apprenticeship as one of the examples where the skill shortages are very significant, and where the opportunities for individuals—without necessarily taking multi-year courses to fill those positions—are quite high.

We have a range of programs that recognize that one in five Canadians is actually working in skilled trades. For those individuals who may have been outside the labour market, or haven't had post-secondary education before, this is a really interesting pathway.

I'll give some examples. There's an apprenticeship initiative grant provided to the employers of $1,000 per level per year for the individuals. There's a grant when those individuals complete the program. There are interest-free loans that can be provided to people doing the apprenticeship programs. That's an example on the mismatched side, and we would be happy to provide the committee with more details on those things.

The area that I think is more challenging, and on which we're making significant effort, is the individuals from groups that have historically not been participating at the same rates in the labour market. I think of indigenous people as a great example of that. That's where we have community-based programs, such as the indigenous skills program, to be able to drive this.

I think it's about working together not only to pull more people into the labour market to reduce the mismatch, but also working with those market forces that are very helpful in terms of employers identifying those skills that are necessary.

[Ramesh Sangha, Liberal, Brampton Centre, ON]

It's a good idea to bring people into the labour market. More people going into the labour market will reduce poverty.

My question is—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Mr. Sangha, I'm sorry. I have to cut you off, as we're well past time. Thank you.

Up next is MP Falk, please.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

You have six minutes.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

Okay. Thank you.

I just want to make a note. This isn't really a question, but more of a statement. Minister Duclos had this term, “20th-of-the-month effect”. I don't know if it was the department that coined that term in 2016, or the government, but I became a mother for the first time in 2013, and I noticed the 20-month effect well before then, under a Conservative government that supported child benefits. I just have to make sure I put that on record.

I have a question regarding new horizons. We know that for years, the new horizons for seniors program has delivered funding to community-based projects and that it has done great work, especially with engaging youth and seniors together. It makes a difference in the lives of both the youth and seniors. Unfortunately, again—just like last week, when I brought up the Canada summer jobs program—several of my colleagues have raised concerns about the delivery of the program this year.

As we know, MP offices are provided with lists of approved projects for funding and are invited to contact the organizations and their recipients to inform them of their successful applications. After MPs' offices were contacted, ESDC informed them that these lists were inaccurate. This happened after phone calls were already made. In some cases, funding was reduced, increased and, in one instance, completely revoked. The errors they have described can obviously have devastating outcomes for organizations, especially if they're already implementing plans to execute these programs and if they were already told that funds were committed to them.

This concern is compounded by an issue I brought up last week—I know that some of the officials were here for that as well—with the AG's report, concerning the government's failure to help the eight million Canadians who are trying to access somebody on a phone and aren't able to do that. It's compounding after compounding—let alone the fact that most of these organizations are run by seniors already. It adds a layer of confusion: you have been approved, now disapproved, and now you can't contact anybody and you're told to call back, but the voice mailbox is full.

I'm wondering if the department has a response for these organizations why these funding errors occurred.

[Leslie MacLean, Senior Associate Deputy Minister of Employment and Social Development and Chief Operating Officer for Service Canada, Department of Employment and Social Development]

I'd be happy to take the question, and if there's a desire for a follow-up question on the call centre audit, I'd be happy to take those questions as well.

Yes, there absolutely was human error committed by my staff and me. We apologize, and we have reached out to all the organizations that had an incorrect amount of funding.

Very simply, we were extracting the information from our database. It was human error, and we didn't have the dollar amounts aligned. I am not aware of any organizations that were not qualified. I'd be happy to follow up off-line on that. The fundamental issue was the misalignment of dollar values. In all cases, we have been reaching out individually to the organizations to explain our error. Of course, we're apologizing for that error. We've been moving forward quite aggressively. My understanding is that we already have 654 agreements set up as a result of the funding in budget 2019.

If there are organizations that have outstanding questions, it is a Service Canada error. We're happy to correct it with any organization that has outstanding questions.

Again, my apologies.

[Rosemarie Falk, Conservative, Battlefords—Lloydminster, SK]

What is being done to correct that? If funding was approved for x dollars, and then all of a sudden some was revoked, is Service Canada honouring the initial amount?