Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to address Private Members' Motion No. 30. The motion reads as follows:
That, in the opinion of this House, the government should consider amending the Income Tax Act to provide a Care-Giver Tax Credit for those who provide care in the home for pre-school children, the disabled, the chronically-ill or the aged.
The purpose of this motion is to help people who greatly need to be helped. The disability tax credit is a tax measure that exists at the provincial level, at least in Quebec, and at the federal level. It is a non-refundable tax credit.
In 1994, this credit amounted to $4,233. It is to be noted that it was originally established to help those who became disabled during the war. In order to be eligible for the credit, the applicant must submit, with his income tax return, a Revenue Canada form duly completed by a doctor or an optometrist.
There are currently a number of tax measures designed to help families that take care of elderly or disabled people. However, we believe these measures are not enough.
The numerous flaws of the current taxation system make me quite angry at times. How can this government turn a deaf ear to such a motion, while seeking to smother the scandal of family trust assets transferred tax free to the United States? Two billion dollars left the country tax free, while ordinary taxpayers are being taxed to the hilt.
My colleague, the hon. member for Saint-Hyacinthe-Bagot and official opposition finance critic, mentioned recently that Liberals question the qualifications of the Auditor General and his team by refusing to answer his questions, and suggesting that Mr. Desautels has stepped outside his terms of reference.
Liberal members of the finance committee are trying to demean an institution whose main goal is to make sure the government is held accountable.
I am also quite sensitive to the treatment of older people, in my capacity as the official opposition representative for seniors organizations. I have taken the floor many times in the House to uphold the rights of seniors. We should not forget the Canadian population is growing older.
A 1991 survey on aging and self care has shown that nearly one third of Canadians were 45 or older in 1991, with 19 per cent being between 45 and 64 and 11 per cent 65 or older. As the baby boomers grow older, we can expect a rapid increase in the number of seniors.
Projections over the 1991-2001 period tell us that the population growth in the 45 plus group will be almost three times faster than in the general population, that is 32 and 13 per cent respectively.
The well-being of the aged, as measured by their health, their revenue and their degree of integration in society, seems to be strongly related to the quality of housing and the ability to move around in their community. Seniors and the disabled very often prefer to stay in their community with the assistance of a member of their immediate family or another relative.
It appears quite reasonable to give a tax credit to a taxpayer who can work full time and give appropriate care to a dependent person. People who do not have to move into residences run by strangers experience a better quality of life.
Seniors are often seen as a burden in our communities. They are socially dead. But if they remain in their own community, these people can be part of their community and feel more secure, financially or otherwise.
I also rose in this House to have a grandparents' day celebrated every year and also have a grandparents' year designated, to recognize the role these people play in the family unit, especially in child rearing.
These people are often the link between the past, the present and the future. Therefore, you will understand why Motion No. 30 is of particular concern to me and why its implementation raises several questions in my mind.
Today's edition of Le Devoir includes highlights of the report of the Auditor General of Canada, Denis Desautels. It says that Revenue Canada has laid itself open to fraud by not sufficiently controlling or assessing the GST credit program and the child tax benefits, which combined and replaced the old family allowance and child tax credit. These programs cost $8 billion every year.
It adds that among the issues that were raised was the fact that Revenue Canada does not require a birth certificate before granting the tax benefit. The assessment of the applications for disability benefits paid by the Canada Pension Plan is inadequate. The total amount of these benefits has tripled in the last 10 years, increasing from $841 million to $3 billion. In comparison, disability benefits paid by the Régime des rentes du Québec have remained almost stable during the same period.
The report also concluded that a general improvement of government phone services was in order. Too often, the lines are overloaded and the information given by the operators is incorrect. Revenue Canada has a particularly poor performance, in this regard.
How can we not worry about potential fraud, since there are people who abuse the system, unfortunately.
Moreover, if the government gives the tax credit to people who stay at home and take care of preschool children or handicapped, chronically ill or senior members of the family, it could be tempted to reduce benefits, in particular the old age security or the child tax benefit.
To conclude, Motion M-30 brought forward by my colleague for Mississauga-South is valid in principle, but it would require increased vigilance to avoid potential fraud.