Human Resources Committee on Oct. 28th, 2025

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Unfortunately, you have only five seconds left.

Therefore, I'm going to go ahead and give the floor to Ms. Larouche for her two and a half minutes.

[Andréanne Larouche, Bloc, Shefford, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

We are talking about standing up for seniors. Ms. McLean, we met in June in connection with your position as the Secretary of State for Seniors. I told you about my concerns that the government was completely overlooking people between the ages of 65 and 74. When it comes to the responsibility for seniors' issues, some are wondering why the government created a secretary of state position rather than a ministerial position. What message was the government trying to send in appointing someone who has less power than a real minister? That's my first question.

Second, the Liberals are responsible for an unacceptable inequity, by creating two classes of seniors: young seniors and old seniors. Keep in mind that, starting at age 65, people collecting their pensions are living on fixed incomes. What's more, just like those 75 and older, people between the ages of 65 and 74 are grappling with rent increases, food inflation and higher drug prices, but they weren't entitled to an increase in their old age security pension or guaranteed income supplement. We introduced Bill C‑319, legislation that sought to raise the guaranteed income supplement exemption from $5,000 to $6,500 before the clawback kicked in. If you're saying that those under 75 can work, as you seem to be, then they shouldn't be penalized for doing so.

Madam Secretary of State, what is your time frame for raising the exemption for income that a senior may receive without having their guaranteed income supplement reduced? That would help level the playing field for seniors who choose to work.

When are you going to eliminate the inequity between these two classes of seniors?

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

I think there are multiple pieces that address your question.

First of all, I'd like to talk about the financial realities that our country finds itself in, given the global economic context. We know that the cost of living is increasing due to tariffs. We know that this means it's going to be difficult for the government coffers to be able to do business as usual, because we're going to have to pivot to other trading markets. Also, the costing for the funding at the same 10% increase would be $19.76 billion over the first six years.

The government has to make tough decisions—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Larouche.

Ms. Roberts, you have five minutes.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Here's my concern. We have a single senior who earns $50,000. We have a couple who earn $50,000. That single senior pays, between federal and Ontario taxes, almost $6,000 in taxes. It's $5,797 to be exact. The couple pays $600. Therefore, we have a single senior who is penalized because she's single and therefore paying more in taxes.

What really upsets me about this is that seniors are going to the food bank to help so that they can bring food home and not feel guilty. Do we really want a society where our seniors, who have built this country and raised us, have to use the food bank?

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

We absolutely don't want a society where anyone feels and experiences a situation where they need to access the food bank in order to make ends meet. That's why it's important to protect the services and investments we're making into seniors.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Excuse me, Secretary. Taxes are eroding the opportunity for seniors to live within their means. We're asking them to budget, but how can they budget when we continue to increase taxes?

I have a simple example here where they're paying out that much in taxes and having to go to a food bank to get food. How do I justify that? How do we change that? How do we change that system for someone who is living below the poverty line who has to go to the food bank because she feels guilty? Also, if she doesn't do that, she doesn't have rent, and if she doesn't have enough money to pay her rent at the end of the month, she'll be kicked out. She has to choose what to do.

We're putting seniors in an awkward position, and we're doing nothing about it. Taxes are continuing to increase, and they're impacting our seniors.

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Obviously, the federal government can't do anything about the provincial taxation in Ontario. That's within the purview of that province.

With respect to what we have control over and what we can do, we are increasing the maximum GIS for single seniors, for example—

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

But she doesn't get it because she's chosen to get a job. She doesn't qualify for it because you claw her back.

When we talk about taxes, the federal taxes on a single senior earning $50,000 is almost $3,700. It doesn't make sense to me that we're asking her to live within her budget. You're giving her GIS. That's great, but that's still not enough when she's paying $2,800 a month in rent. It doesn't justify it. I'm sorry.

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

For the seniors who are working, there's an earnings exemption. That provides a full exemption up to $5,000 of annual employment or self-employment earnings as well as the 50% exemption on the next $10,000 of earnings. This is a total exemption of $10,000 on the first and $15,000 of earnings, which helps—

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

Can I ask another question? I have limited time. I do apologize for interrupting you.

Can I ask you how many full-time FTEs are in the department?

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

I mean, you can ask all the questions you want. If you want answers to some, you'll just have to give me the opportunity to answer them.

In terms of the FTEs, for which year is that—the current year?

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

This is your department. I would assume that you would know how many FTEs you have.

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

You're asking how many FTEs we had for 2022-23. In that year, we had a total of 36,959, but that's not how many FTEs we have today.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

What is it today, then?

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

For 2024-25, it's forecasted to be 35,941—we haven't closed the year out—but for 2023-24 it was 36,615.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

We have over 173,000 seniors—women—living below the poverty line.

How do you justify the FTEs to service our seniors who aren't even making ends meet?

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

This is for the totality of ESDC. This includes labour. It includes employment insurance. It includes the full scope of ESDC, which is one of the largest departments, if not the largest, with the most FTEs in government.

[Anna Roberts, Conservative, King—Vaughan, ON]

I would say—

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you. That was over five minutes.

We will now go to Ms. Fancy for five minutes.

[Jessica Fancy-Landry, Liberal, South Shore—St. Margarets, NS]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I'd like to welcome and thank the secretary, Mr. Thompson and Ms. Underwood for coming here today.

It's nice to talk about those who have helped build the country. My colleagues across the floor have highlighted some very big issues in terms of affordability—which they should—but without the global context of where we are today. I'd like to point out that the Conservative government voted down a number of programs that help bolster the quality of life we all want to see our seniors live. They include reinstating the OAS and the GIS programs, increasing both OAS and GIS programs, and increasing the working allowance, which would help a lot of women. They talked a lot about women living single lives, and that's something that helps bolster them. They voted down dental care and they also voted down pharmacare.

As one of the final speakers today, I would love for you to help us talk about the future and what you see that we can do to look towards the future within this new government. Where do you see the greatest opportunities for progress?

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

Thank you very much for your question.

You raise several really good points and have given me the opportunity to speak to something important that your Conservative colleagues didn't give me the opportunity to address. It's a quick discussion about old age security and where the thresholds are for what they're referring to as clawbacks.

It's important to note that the minimum income threshold in 2024 for a senior before they start receiving any kind of clawback was $90,997. A senior won't start to experience a “clawback” of old age security until they are at the minimum income threshold.

There is the earnings exemption as well, which you mentioned. This allows seniors who are able to continue working.... We know that many are working and that many choose to do so, and this really speaks to the health outcomes of this country and how much we've invested, both provincially and federally, to ensure longevity and a quality of life for seniors in the country.

Looking forward at where things are going, the importance of the times we're living in and the global context cannot be understated. To that end, one of the areas I've been focusing on.... In the short term, we're going to be doing a lot of work on this, but we know it's a whack-a-mole thing, so it will require ongoing government commitment, attention and intention.

We've been focusing on financial security by combatting scams, frauds and financial crime. We know that seniors are disproportionally targeted. That's why I was proud to stand up with Minister Champagne and Secretary Long. One of the first conversations I had with Secretary of State Long was about the need to combat these scams. We know that tens of millions of dollars leave the country every year and go to crime, and that is because seniors have been targeted. These scams are becoming more sophisticated, using AI and the like, so setting up a dedicated, targeted financial agency staffed by specialists and subject matter experts to focus on scams and crime is going to be really important—and not only from a financial perspective.

We've seen stories in the news. Just today, we saw that a senior couple lost their life savings. This is an anti-poverty initiative, ensuring that seniors are protected and that they're not going to be scammed out of their life savings. Our pension system is built as a three-pillar model, with old age security, the CPP and private retirement savings. To see individuals lose the entirety of their private retirement savings means not only that those seniors are at risk of poverty, but that they are going to be more reliant on government services.

This needs to be a focus of this government in our future work, and it will be one of mine.

[The Chair, Liberal, Bobby Morrissey]

Thank you, Ms. Fancy.

For this next set of turns, three committee members will be taking the floor.

We're beginning with Madam Falk for two minutes, and then we'll have the government for two minutes and the Bloc for one minute.

Madam Falk, you have the floor for two minutes.

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

Thank you very much, Chair.

Secretary, I've been hearing you say a lot about the dignity of seniors and ensuring that seniors have dignity. I think dignity is making sure that seniors can live within their means and make choices for themselves. If you talk to seniors, many of them want to age in their own home. They want to stay in their own communities.

I note, in your opening remarks, you said it's important for seniors to access the services they need where they are. Having said that, why is your government supporting the shutting down of rural post offices?

[Stephanie McLean, Liberal, Esquimalt—Saanich—Sooke, BC]

In terms of what is happening with Canada Post and the plans with respect to the future of Canada Post, I really can't speak for my colleague.

What I can say—