Evidence of meeting #23 for Human Resources, Skills and Social Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities in the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was seniors.
A recording is available from Parliament.
As an Individual
The C.D. Howe Institute has published articles, and I had—I'm tempted to use unparliamentary language—a dispute with the C.D. Howe Institute. I wanted a cap on the size of TFSAs.
Conservative
As an Individual
My motivation for a TFSA was simply to find some way that low-income people could save in a tax-advantaged way and not have it all escape into the federal treasury through the GIS. I spent a lot of time talking to seniors who were living on low incomes. They had an average of $30,000, $40,000, or $50,000.
I thought the cap should be $200,000. Once your TFSA gets to $200,000, I would say that you shouldn't be allowed to put any more in. It can still grow tax free, but there should be a cap. I actually think—and I've been quoted as saying this—that the TFSA as currently structured cannot survive, because right now we know that you can build up millions in your TFSA and get the GIS, right?
As soon as there's the article on page 3 of the Report on Business, there are people doing it. They are planning for this. I could do it. I know the rules well enough that I could easily get the GIS and have a very good income that doesn't show up on my tax return. I just incorporate and leave all of the corporate profits in retained earnings.
I think that the TFSA, as currently structured—
Conservative
As an Individual
No. My point is that the TFSA is another example of the same thing. You are allowing people to scam the GIS, and eventually that will become politically unsustainable, I think, but I'm not a politician.
Conservative
Pierre Poilievre Conservative Carleton, ON
In order to get millions of dollars in your TFSA, given the contribution limits, you'd have to be a Warren Buffett type of magician, so if you are, maybe we should speak afterward, because I could use your retirement planning advice.
Liberal
Liberal
Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB
I have to say that the presentations have been absolutely inspiring and very well done.
I have questions for everybody, but I think I'll start with you, Mr. Cook.
One of the reports from your institute, which I read with a lot of interest, talks about alignment of governments and how important it is to have our federal, provincial, municipal, and territorial governments aligned in a poverty reduction strategy.
Given the fact that our minister's mandate letter is to come up with a national poverty reduction strategy, and given the fact that I continually am frustrated by people coming into my office with housing issues, where I have to say that's provincial or what have you, and federal money can go for housing but then it goes into the provinces and they decide, can you just give us some thoughts on this? Can you elaborate—maybe we can go down the table a bit here, just with your thoughts—on how important alignment is between the governments and what you see and what you would correct? Are there any thoughts on that?
Director, Canadian Poverty Institute
Yes, I think alignment is critically important, and my colleague Dr. Moscovitch alluded to where the solution to that lies. When we moved away from the principles of conditionality, from the Canada assistance plan, and moved to the Canada social transfer, which has no conditions, we lost the ability for the federal government to have that alignment.
The opportunity before us, in terms of alignment, is to go back to the principle of rights. As a signatory to the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, we have certain obligations that bind all orders of government. That would be a very powerful framework that would allow that alignment. In fact, it was one of the recommendations from the UN committee when they reported back on Canada's progress earlier this year, that we do build that alignment into our strategies and into our funding arrangements so that rights considerations provide that framework as conditions of federal funding to other orders of government.
Liberal
Professor Emeritus, School of Social Work, Carleton University, As an Individual
Just to be clear, there is one condition around the CST, that no province can establish a residence requirement in relation to social assistance. This goes right back to the 19th century when relief was a ticket to somewhere else, not your town.
Should we have some principles associated with the Canada social transfer? I believe so.
Professor Emeritus, School of Social Work, Carleton University, As an Individual
I would like to see them stated broadly in the way that the Canada Health Act establishes the five conditions. I would like to see some broad conditions, but I think it's important to understand that nothing works without the consent of all the governments we're talking about. What we're talking about is trying to establish a consensual framework between the provinces and the federal government. The last time there was some discussion about that was in the 1990s, and it was actually the provinces that took the lead on trying to establish those principles and it was the federal government that was not, at that point, responsive.
I don't want to suppose that it's the provinces that would necessarily be opposed to this. I think that has to be tested, but it was simply dropped. The discussion at that time was about a social charter and it simply fell off the table. I do think it should go back on the table and it would be valuable to look back at the principles that were discussed at that time.
October 20th, 2016 / 10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Associate Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
Alignment of provincial and federal governments is crucial. I understand what the other speakers said.
Liberal
Wayne Long Liberal Saint John—Rothesay, NB
Naturally, in Atlantic Canada, we are all Liberal at this point, with provincial Liberal governments too, and I can see first-hand the value and benefits of alignment, but obviously that's not going to happen.
Associate Professor, Graduate School of Public and International Affairs, University of Ottawa, As an Individual
One suggestion I made in a piece in Policy Options in April is that for health, we have an institute for health indicators that helps us assess. People who are in there are from the federal government, municipal governments, and provincial governments, as well as health care providers. They collect administrative data and survey data to get an idea of what our health system is doing for Canadians. We don't have an equivalent institute for social indicators.
For me, as a researcher who focuses on social policy, it's so hard to see those different layers and the impact on people. I would argue that this is where, given the challenges you have as a federal government in not meddling too much in provincial business, one role could be to provide at least the information that is out there so that we can see how these programs interact. That would mean sources of funding to such an institute, which the government does for health in Canada.
As an Individual
I have a quick comment on data. There was an organization in Ottawa called the National Council of Welfare, which no longer exists. It was attached to HRSDC, or whatever it is called today. They collected data on welfare rates by province, so you could actually compare, if you're employable, or a person with a disability, or single family, and also all the clawbacks, asset limits, all the rules. That organization doesn't exist anymore and I'm not sure it's being done.
Is Caledon doing it?
