Human Resources Committee on Oct. 18th, 2016

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank the witnesses for their remarks.

Mr. Chair, I have noticed that the constituents who elected us expect a high degree of transparency in the work we do. After years of the government's making use of in camera meetings for a variety of purposes, I think it's important to set some parameters around their use now.

That is why I would like to give notice of the following motion:

That the Committee may only meet in camera for the following purposes: (a) to consider wages, salaries and other employee benefits; (b) to consider contracts and contract negotiations; (c) to consider labour relations and personnel matters; (d) to consider a draft report or agenda; (e) for briefings concerning national or parliamentary security; (f) to consider matters where privacy or the protection of personal information is required; (g) to receive legal, administrative or procedural advice from the House of Commons' Administration; (h) for any other reason, with the unanimous consent of the Committee; That the Chair may schedule all or portions of a meeting to be in camera for the reasons listed above; That any motion to sit in camera shall be subject to a debate where the mover, and one member from each of the other recognized parties, be given up to three minutes each to speak to the motion; and that the mover shall then be given up to one minute to respond.

Of course, you have the English version as well.

Since I still have some time, I'm going to ask a question about the GIS.

According to the figures provided to us, the situation of seniors living in poverty is troubling. When I go back to my riding, I regularly hear from people that they, themselves, or people they know didn't receive the GIS when they needed it.

I have to tell you I can't understand why the GIS isn't paid out automatically to those who need it.

[Nancy Milroy-Swainson]

Thank you for your question. I'm going to answer in English.

You're absolutely right that we have programs for Canadians and we want to make sure that all eligible Canadians receive their benefits. For this reason, we've recently modified the method of processing guaranteed income supplement benefits and old age security benefits. A large portion of old age security benefits will be paid proactively and automatically. Canadians who meet eligibility requirements, who have 40 years of residence in Canada, and who have 40 years of contributions to the Canada pension plan, will be automatically enrolled in old age security, so they don't need to apply anymore.

Service Canada is working to expand that automatic enrolment to other populations. We're looking at whether or not we can move to automatic enrolment for guaranteed income supplement recipients. At the same time, another initiative we have in place is to take advantage of tax filing information for Canadians. Every year, guaranteed income supplement benefits need to be renewed because they're based on income. As of July 1 of each year, GIS benefits are recalculated based on the prior tax year's income. If the seniors file a tax return or they submit a declaration of income, those benefits are automatically renewed every year. That's not 100% of seniors who are eligible for GIS.

We are looking at ways to improve the take-up of those programs and to make sure that Canadians get their benefits as quickly as they can. We're looking at better understanding why some Canadians don't apply, even though they may be aware of the program. We're looking at ways to make the awareness of the program greater. We're looking at ways to expand automatic enrolment. All of those are absolutely intended to try to make sure all Canadians who are eligible for those benefits are able to receive them.

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

Thank you.

I have one last question.

I've worked with people who have a disability. More and more, they are outliving their parents. Those parents are incredibly worried about what will happen to their children later in life. I was dismayed to learn just how underused the registered disability savings plan is and how unaware people are of the program.

In your presentation, you said you wanted to promote the program more. I'd like to know what that means. How are you going to make sure those who need it are aware of the program's benefits?

[Nancy Milroy-Swainson]

That's also a good question, merci.

I'll call on my colleague, James Van Raalte, who is the director general of the office for disability issues and is responsible for the delivery of the program.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

I'm sorry, sir, but I'll give you about 15 to 20 seconds.

[James Van Raalte, Director General, Office for Disability Issues, Income Security and Social Development Branch, Employment and Social Development Canada]

Very good. Thank you for the question, Mr. Chair.

With respect to promotion around the registered disability savings program, we have a number of instruments to improve awareness and increase take-up. We use outreach contracts with disability organizations to provide awareness sessions and one-on-one meetings with persons with disabilities to help them enrol in an RDSP. We use various targeted marketing strategies in print, radio, and television. Our most successful tool is targeted mail-outs to disability tax credit recipients with follow-up teleconferences to help them build their awareness and open an RDSP. Finally, we provide RDSP literature and communication tools emphasizing that there is no requirement to make contributions for the beneficiary to receive the Canada disability savings bond.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you so much.

We'll go over to Mr. Ruimy, please.

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

Thank you very much.

My questions are going to be for Mr. Heisz. These are interesting statistics you have here, and that's what I want to focus on. In order to move forward with any poverty study, we have to understand what it is that we're measuring. When I look at what you've given us, and when I look at the number of seniors who come into my office who are living on $1,500 a month and who don't have enough to pay rent because rent is so exorbitant where we are in British Columbia, then I question how we're defining poverty. That's where I'd like to go.

Beyond the low-income measure, what other statistics and data are currently being used to define poverty in Canada?

[Andrew Heisz]

The position of Statistics Canada with respect to poverty.... The term “poverty” and the measure of poverty was well articulated by our chief statistician in 1997 when he said that Statistics Canada doesn't measure poverty per se, it measures low income. Poverty is a question of social consensus, and it requires guidance from the government to identify what it is they want measured and how Statistics Canada should measure it. Given that, and given the wide usage of low-income statistics in the media and academic publications, the main measures that Statistics Canada uses that reflect on the situation of poverty would be like the income ones that I showed you today.

We do have other indicators of disadvantaged situations that could also be very useful and illuminating. Some of these were developed with other federal departments. For example, there's the market basket measure, which prices out the cost of a number of goods deemed to be necessary for participation in society from year to year. The price of that basket of goods can be used to determine a threshold. Some 40 or so different thresholds were created for different regions of Canada. I should mention that this is in sponsorship with Employment and Social Development Canada.

With CMHC, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, we also have a core housing need measure that integrates elements of housing. We also have a food security measure, which is developed with Health Canada to reflect on some of the different elements of nutrition and having enough food to eat.

Finally, I'd mentioned that Statistics Canada has for the Ontario government and for the federal government conducted indicators of a type of low-income measure called “material deprivation”. That's also another way, and a non-monetary indicator, that can be used to track whether or not Canadians have access to different goods and services that are deemed necessary.

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

Let's go back to housing, because housing has been in the news quite a bit over the last few years. In Vancouver, for instance, it's almost impossible to even rent a place. When you have an income of $1,500 a month and your rent is in the neighbourhood of $1,000, it doesn't leave you very much. Do we need to revisit the housing portion of this?

[Andrew Heisz]

I wouldn't feel comfortable with saying that we need to revisit it, but I believe that the mandate is to look at all aspects of measurement, and certainly housing could be reflected in this review.

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

In relation to how we are collecting the data.... A lot of folks are just living off the street. Where do they fit into this whole mix?

[Andrew Heisz]

Statistics Canada doesn't compile statistics on the homeless, unfortunately, so that would have to be a new measure added as well.

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

Are you saying we don't collect anything on the homeless and we have no idea how many homeless people are on the streets across Canada?

[Andrew Heisz]

I believe that, with every census, we do measure the number of people in—

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

If they are on the street, then they are not being counted.

[Andrew Heisz]

They would have to be enumerated in shelters, but yes, you're right.

It would be a methodological challenge to measure such a population in a statistically robust way.

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

That population could skew the number you have given us here.

[Andrew Heisz]

The numbers of low income that I have presented to you today, which are on the order of 8%, 10%, or 12% of the population, amount to millions and millions of people, so whether it could skew it or not.... I don't know how large the homeless population is, but it would have to be very large in order to skew these numbers.

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

That's a problem.

What about our indigenous population? How does that figure in here?

[Andrew Heisz]

On the indigenous population, the distinction I would like to make is whether they live on reserve or off reserve. The statistics I showed you today for the indigenous population are for the off-reserve indigenous population.

We also compute similar statistics for the indigenous population on reserve with each census. Although I didn't show results on the indigenous population on reserve today, we do prepare results for this group every five years.

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

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bryan May]

Thank you very much.

We'll go to MP Tassi, please.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Before I pose my question, I feel compelled to make a statement with respect to our government. It is important to recognize that our government realizes that most people want to be self-sustaining, and that is why we've made investments to create jobs and grow the economy. A number of the measures we've discussed already have been put in place to help people in the interim and to bring them forward.

The question I would like to begin with deals with women in poverty, specifically. The risk of poverty is greatest among women, particularly single mothers, senior women living alone, aboriginal women, and women living with disabilities. Mr. Heisz, your slide 12 demonstrates that.

Can anyone address what is being done with respect to this particular group? Going forward, what analyses or statistics do we have that are going to help us address this issue?

[Nancy Milroy-Swainson]

I could start, and others could add. From the point of view of old age security, guaranteed income supplement, we know that the majority of those living in poverty on these benefits are women. We also know that the majority of those women are unattached women, so nearly two-thirds of seniors living in poverty are women. Most are single, so increasing the guaranteed income supplement by $947 per year for single seniors benefited almost 900,000 Canadians. Two-thirds of those were women living alone. There was a large effort in the context of increasing the guaranteed income supplement to address low income among senior women.