Human Resources Committee on Feb. 10th, 2023

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you so much, Wayne, for that very important question.

Thanks to your mom for sharing the fact that the benefits are indexed, and they're indexed quarterly for seniors. We have one of the best pension systems in Canada and we should be proud of that. Should we be doing more? Absolutely, yes, we should be, because there are vulnerable seniors whom we need to make sure we're supporting. This has been a priority.

I remember I got elected with you, Wayne, back in 2015. One thing we ran on was to make sure we were going to restore the age of retirement back from 67 to 65, which the Conservative Party of Canada wanted to increase for seniors. They wanted them to work longer. Do you know what, Wayne? That would have come into force this year. At this time that we're seeing all these affordability challenges throughout the country, if the Conservative Party of Canada were in government, seniors would be working even more right now. We know the challenges they would have been going through right now. Thank God for the work you do in your own community to make sure we support seniors.

As you know, we restored the age of eligibility for old age security and the guaranteed income supplement back to 65. We then increased the guaranteed income supplement, and I want to spend a little bit of time on this, because this measure supports some of the lowest-income seniors in our country. The majority of those we are supporting are the most vulnerable, the majority being single women. Because of this measure, I know that 45,000 seniors have been lifted out of poverty. This measure alone has helped over 900,000 seniors in our country.

We've of course enhanced the Canada pension plan to make sure we're thinking of those future retirees and making sure they have supports as they move forward.

Last July we fulfilled the commitment we made to Canadians by increasing the old age security pension by 10% for those 75 and older, because we know Canadian seniors are living longer, which is a good thing, but that also comes with increased costs. They're also more likely to have a disability or more likely to have challenges, which is why we increased that.

So—

[Wayne Long, Liberal, Saint John—Rothesay, NB]

Minister, my time is precious here, but I thank you for this. I do have another question.

We always hear from our colleagues about people who come into their offices and about comments from their constituents. Well, I happen to be in Market Square, where there's a seniors complex, and lots of seniors come into my office.

This is a true story. I had a senior come into my office a few months back, and he asked my advice about Bitcoin. He actually said to me, “Look, I've heard the Leader of the Opposition on TV talking about Bitcoin. Do you think that's a good thing I should invest in?” Obviously, for a senior at that age I was saying, “Whoa, whoa, hold on. You shouldn't touch that.”

Can you talk briefly about what would have happened with seniors if they had invested in that?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Oh, my goodness. Thanks for that very important question, Wayne.

Let me say I think the Conservative leader had a very specific plan for Canadians to opt out of inflation, and it was to invest in volatile cryptocurrency and Bitcoin. That is completely irresponsible advice for so many seniors who are on fixed incomes and facing affordability challenges. By my accounting, if a senior had taken his advice and invested $10,000 of their hard-earned retirement savings, it would be worth approximately $5,000 today. Seniors' hard-earned money is not a joke.

I see some of our colleagues laughing on the other side. It's not a joke. We know global inflation has made it extremely difficult for many people, but this—

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

I have a point of order, Mr. Chair.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

—reckless advice would have seen their savings completely—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Madam Minister, a point of order has been raised.

[Tracy Gray, Conservative, Kelowna—Lake Country, BC]

Thank you very much.

The minister had made the comment that others were laughing on the side. There are two of us on this side over here, and neither of us was laughing. I wanted to clarify that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Madam Gray, that's not a point of order.

Okay, Madam Minister, we'll conclude with that.

Ms. Larouche, you have two and a half minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have another question for the minister.

As you know, we learned last fall that 70,000 newly retired persons, including thousands of Quebeckers, had not received their OAS cheques on time, despite the fact that they had contributed their entire lives. This is another striking example of your government's incompetence, Madam Minister; these people are entitled to receive their pension but are unfortunately paying the price.

Can you follow up on these 70,000 newly retired persons who were supposed to receive their pension but were abandoned by your government? Has this matter now been resolved?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

I'm happy to turn to my officials for your specific question.

I will just say that ensuring that seniors have support to access information about their pension benefits is extremely important to our government. As you know, the old age security program is one of the largest programs of the Government of Canada. In 2021-22, it paid $60.8 billion of benefits to 6.9 million Canadians—

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Minister, I do not need an explanation of the OAS program: I want to know whether the matter of the 70,000 seniors who did not receive their cheque because your government was unable to deliver has been resolved or if you still have to follow up on it.

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

I will be happy to turn to Cliff, but I can tell you that the funding we have put in the supplementary estimates, which is $46.4 million to increase the old age security workload capacity, is exactly that: It's to make sure that seniors get all the benefits they deserve.

However, I will turn to Cliff or any of the officials to—

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Madam Minister, I will listen to Mr. Groen's answer, but I must first point out that all the measures you are talking about, including the GST credit and CMHC, are general measures that will not in any way help seniors financially in the long term.

You mentioned the new horizons program, which is good. It helps seniors stay active, but it does not put money in their pockets or wallets to pay for groceries and medicine and get to the end of the month. What could help them is increasing OAS. For people living in poverty, their needs do not begin at the age of 75. I am repeating this because you have not been able to tell me why you continue to divide seniors into two classes with this program, which is offered to everyone as of the age of 65.

I will let Mr. Groen use the few remaining seconds to answer the question about the 70,000 seniors.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Madam Larouche, the time is expired.

I would also like to caution members to keep in mind the interpreters who are providing translation services. If you could speak slowly, it would greatly assist the interpretation.

We will now move to Madam Zarrillo for two and a half minutes.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to revisit the rates of poverty and the extreme conditions that are happening in Canada in relation to seniors. I don't want to see what's happened in health care happen to seniors with housing and poverty rates. We can forecast that there will be many seniors who will need income supports, so I want to revisit this OAS conversation around those aged 65 to 75.

The price of a loaf of bread is the same whether you're 65 or 75. At this point in time, the government has chosen to only increase the OAS for seniors over 75. It's been mentioned today and it's been mentioned by my colleague, our critic for seniors, that this is discrimination.

Why does the minister believe that seniors under 75 don't deserve the same financial supports and the same ability to pay their rent and buy food?

[Kamal Khera, Liberal, Brampton West, ON]

Let me first reiterate that I think our record speaks for itself in supporting all seniors. That is precisely why one of the very first things we have done was to restore the age to make sure seniors who are 65 and up rightfully get the benefits that they need and deserve.

As the member also knows, we actually increased the guaranteed income supplement for all seniors aged 65 and up who needed that support. As Ms. Zarrillo would know, these are some of the most vulnerable, lowest-income seniors. They are some of the poorest seniors in our country. Because of these measures of enhancing the OAS and the guaranteed income supplement, we have lifted 45,000 seniors out of poverty. It has actually helped 900,000 seniors.

In terms of your question on why the old age security increase is for those 75 and up, stats have shown us that Canadian seniors are living longer, which is a good thing. That means we're doing good things in Canada. However, that also means they're more likely to have a disability, lose a spouse, have increased health expenses and be more likely to outlive their savings. We needed to make sure that we're providing that additional support to Canadians who need it, particularly those seniors during that time as they are aging.

With that being said, all the benefits that we have put forward for all seniors, such as the old age security, the Canada pension plan and the guaranteed income supplement, are designed to provide benefits that increase with the cost of living. These payments only ever increase or stay the same; they actually never go down. Old age benefits rates are reviewed quarterly to ensure they reflect the cost of living, and CPP is reviewed yearly.

[Bonita Zarrillo, NDP, Port Moody—Coquitlam, BC]

Thank you so much, Minister. I just want to—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Madam Zarrillo. Our time is gone.

Thank you, Minister Khera.

I have one item left under business before we adjourn the meeting.

Before we do that, thank you, Minister and departmental officials, for appearing today. You may leave.

Committee members, last night you received in your electronic binders a draft of the news release referencing Bill C-35. If I am seeing consensus, the clerk may release the news release if there are no objections.

Go ahead, Mme. Chabot.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

Mr. Chair, can I have some time to look over the press release? I will get back to you with an answer sometime today.

I'm sorry, but I have not had the chance to look over the press release.

Can you give us until 4 p.m. to send you our answer?

It should not be a problem, but—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Okay.

[Louise Chabot, Bloc, Thérèse-De Blainville, QC]

I will send you my answer by email, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

For all committee members, then, if we do not hear from you by four o'clock, the press release will be released as it has been presented to you.

Thank you so much, committee members, for this morning.

The meeting is adjourned.