Mr. Speaker, it is my turn to speak to Bill C-54. My speech will deal with two aspects. First, there is the whole issue of personal information. The reason we are opposed to this bill as it now stands is that the government wants to add Canada Post, among others, to the list of agencies and departments which already have access to this information. We may wonder why Canada Post needs to know this, but I think there is no reason to be concerned in this case.
Correctional Service Canada is a little more disturbing. Why Correctional Service? They may need it for criminal investigations, and that would be okay, I suppose. But the RCMP, the Minister of Justice, members of Parliament? At the moment, the management of intelligence services is raising many questions and creating a great deal of uncertainty among the general public.
I think that now is not the time to add to the list, especially when dealing with clients, in this case seniors, who may be more vulnerable to fuller disclosure of personal information or to allowing a larger number of government organizations, departments and agencies to look at seniors' files.
We know that seniors-it will be our turn some day-live in insecurity, especially those with few resources. We in the Official Opposition are very concerned about the provisions adding a significant number of government bodies to the list of those with access to personal information. That is why the other day the hon. member for Papineau-Saint-Michel proposed an amendment which was rejected but which would have imposed some limits on the collection of personal information.
The second aspect is, of course, the efficiency measures. They want to improve service to seniors-as stated in the objectives of the bill-and simplify access to old age pensions, while at the same time taking measures to recover money from clients who, as I said earlier, are very worried. I saw people again this week in my riding office who are worried about social program reform. I do not want to indulge in grandstanding, but old age pensions are excluded from this reform. Meanwhile, the Minister of Finance is travelling across Canada and telling everybody that there will be a reform of social programs but that spending will also have to be cut.
Seniors-for whom I want to speak out-are worried. Again yesterday, two seniors told me the same thing at a meeting of the Committee on Human Resources Development. Can we guarantee that old age pensions will not be affected? Unfortunately, we see here some measures that reduce the retroactive period for an application to one year from five. Previously, seniors could apply to the government and had up to five years to do so. Now it is reduced to one.
Eliminating the grace period would, it is estimated, save the government $1 to $2 million. The bill has a provision whereby the minister can stop making benefit payments while an appeal is reviewed.
Imagine someone who wants to appeal a decision under this bill. Now, all of a sudden, as a result of the minister's discretionary power or the department's delegated authority, his benefit payments would stop. This means that the burden of proof is on him, because he is penalized right away, and his old age pension payments are stopped until a decision is made on the appeal.
These economy measures are somewhat contrary to the purpose of the law, which it seems was meant to make the Canada Pension Plan procedures easier for seniors.
For these two main reasons, especially the increased number of agencies, if the bill is passed as is, it would give access to private information on individual seniors. Moreover, the savings would be made on the backs of people who are among the most vulnerable in our society, seniors, most of whom, as we know, are barely scraping by.
I think that the government-because the amounts saved are about $1 or $2 million in each case, for a total of around $4 million for all of Canada-should not make seniors feel more insecure. These savings are not worth it. These people have contributed to society all their life and I think they deserve peace of mind and reassurance about their pensions.