House of Commons Hansard #187 of the 37th Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was students.

Topics

ChildrenOral Question Period

Noon

The Speaker

The hon. member for Charlevoix.

InfrastructureOral Question Period

Noon

Bloc

Gérard Asselin Bloc Charlevoix, QC

Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Transport has dragged his feet for so long regarding the port transfer policy that he let the docks of Trois-Pistoles and Les Escoumins deteriorate, which resulted in the interruption of the ferry service between the two towns, thus depriving the North Shore and the Lower St. Lawrence of this service.

Does the minister intend to authorize the urgent repair of these two docks, which are essential to eastern Quebec's economic development and tourism?

InfrastructureOral Question Period

Noon

Don Valley East Ontario

Liberal

David Collenette LiberalMinister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, I must inform the hon. member that my departmental officials are monitoring the situation and are well aware of the problems experienced by many Quebec ports. We hope to be able to settle this issue.

InfrastructureOral Question Period

Noon

NDP

Bev Desjarlais NDP Churchill, MB

Mr. Speaker, Ontario truckers, the CAA and others are outraged by possible tolls on Highway 403. The federal government spends only 5% of gas tax revenue on roads.

In 1999 the auditor general criticized Transport Canada's funding process and lack of accountability in spending to help the provinces maintain and upgrade the country's highways. What is the consequences? Bad roads, toll highways, user fees and more taxes.

When will the government make a real investment in Canada's highways so we do not have to continue using the idea of tolls?

InfrastructureOral Question Period

Noon

Don Valley East Ontario

Liberal

David Collenette LiberalMinister of Transport

Mr. Speaker, I do not know where the hon. member has been for the last few years, but in the 2000 budget $600 million was appropriated for highways across the country. Those are now being worked out in agreements with the provinces.

Two billion dollars was announced in the last budget for critical infrastructure and hopefully a lot of that can be spent on highways. In fact there has been a lot of discussion about highways in the last number of weeks. The government has programs and those programs will bear fruit.

The hon. member should realize that notwithstanding the criticism in 1999 by the auditor general, in the last auditor general's report Transport Canada was congratulated for remedying the situation.

Leader of the OppositionOral Question Period

Noon

West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast B.C.

Canadian Alliance

John Reynolds Canadian AllianceLeader of the Opposition

Mr. Speaker, this will be my last question as opposition leader today.

Leader of the OppositionOral Question Period

Noon

Some hon. members

Hear, hear.

Leader of the OppositionOral Question Period

Noon

Some hon. members

Good job.

Leader of the OppositionOral Question Period

Noon

Canadian Alliance

John Reynolds Canadian Alliance West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast, BC

Mr. Speaker, I have played a lot of roles in the House but none as interesting, demanding or rewarding as this. Still, I am looking forward to May 21 when our new leader is sworn in and takes his seat. I know the Prime Minister is looking forward to this as well and will welcome Stephen Harper as the eighth Leader of the Opposition that he has faced.

I would ask the government one final question. Will it commit today to have the Prime Minister stick around long enough so that he can welcome prime minister Stephen Harper as Mr. Harper's first Leader of the Opposition?

Leader of the OppositionOral Question Period

Noon

Ottawa South Ontario

Liberal

John Manley LiberalDeputy Prime Minister and Minister of Infrastructure and Crown Corporations

Mr. Speaker, I am not quite sure what timeframe he may have in mind. I know the Prime Minister's intention is to be in politics until at least the year 2020 which may or may not accommodate that timeframe.

We congratulate the Leader of the Opposition on the excellent job he has done and we wish him well. My advice to him on his last day is that he probably should stick around just in case he is needed to fill in again.

Presence in GalleryOral Question Period

Noon

The Speaker

I draw the attention of hon. members to the presence in the gallery of a parliamentary delegation from Mexico led by Senator Silvia Hernandez.

Presence in GalleryOral Question Period

Noon

Some hon. members

Hear, hear.

Canadian ForcesRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

Haliburton—Victoria—Brock Ontario

Liberal

John O'Reilly LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of National Defence

Mr. Speaker, pursuant to the standing orders, I have the honour to table, in both official languages, copies of the 2000-01 annual report of the Canadian Forces Housing Agency.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

Liberal

Peter Adams Liberal Peterborough, ON

Mr. Speaker, I have the honour to present the 56th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding its order of reference from the House of Commons of Tuesday, February 28, in relation to the main estimates for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2003, in regard to vote 30 under Privy Council, Office of the Chief Electoral Officer.

The committee reports the same.

I also have the honour to present the 57th report of the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs regarding its order of reference from the House of Friday, April 19 in relation to Bill S-34, an act respecting royal assent to bills passed by the Houses of Parliament.

The committee has considered Bill S-34 and reports the bill without amendment.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:05 p.m.

Bloc

Marcel Gagnon Bloc Champlain, QC

Mr. Speaker, I move that the sixth report of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, presented on Tuesday, December 4, 2001, be concurred in.

Mr. Speaker, in December and during all of last fall, we, at the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, were pleased to study, among other things, the issue of seniors.

For that study, the committee invited many people to speak to this issue in particular. There were discussions about the guaranteed income supplement.

We realized that a really scandalous situation had been going on for eight years across Canada and that about 270,000 Canadians were deprived from the GIS they were entitled to.

Out of these 270,000 Canadians, 68,000 live in Quebec. That is simple. When we talk about figures, we are always asked where they are coming from. Those figures were provided to the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities by the department itself. As for the figure of 68,000, we simply divided 270,000 by four since Quebecers account for about 25% of the Canadian population.

Who is entitled to the GIS? Those people who do not have enough income to have decent standard of living in their old age. The expression guaranteed income supplement says it all: it is a supplement provided to those who need it most.

We realized that, almost on purpose, the government and the department forgot about the poorest members of our society, the people who are eligible to this supplement, the people they do not look for or simply fail to find because they do not have the proper tools to do so.

Who is not missing out on the guaranteed income supplement? According to the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities, whose members unanimously supported the report, and the expert witnesses we heard, these are usually the people who find themselves outside the mainstream society. They are almost always the poorest members of our society. Who are these people we are looking for? Let me list some of the target groups that the department should have tried harder to reach out to.

When we heard about this issue, the caucus of the Bloc Quebecois asked me, as the critic for seniors, to look into it. I was also asked to try to find people the Department of Human Resources Development could not reach.

I met with thousands of people at 27 meetings, press conferences and other get togethers with representatives of senior organizations in Quebec.

I realized not only that the report was not an exaggeration, but that the situation was even worse. When we go in the filed and talk to people, we realize that many more people than we thought are missing out on this program.

Who are the people that could not be reached? We have, for instance, the people who have never worked outside the home. As Yvon Deschamps, a stand-up comic from Quebec, once said, “They are the people who had too much work at home to work outside the home”.

Between 95% and 98% of these are stay at home mothers who worked hard to build our society and to make us what we are. At this late stage in their lives, they do not necessarily show up on any list of the Department of Human Resources Development to be entitled to the guaranteed income supplement. They are among the forgotten ones.

At the same time, when we try to determine who is affected by poverty in our society, we find, oddly enough, that elderly women are forgotten in the guaranteed income supplement program. These people do not file income tax returns.

During my visits, I asked them “Why do you not file an income tax return?” Someone told me, “I do not have a penny to declare. Why would I file a tax return?” Of course we have to explain to this person that it pays to do so, because it allows him or her to claim the guaranteed income supplement.

These people include aboriginal, residents of remote communities and people who do not have much of an education. In spite of the measures taken by the government to reach them, if these people can neither read nor write, if they are isolated, they have little chance of having access to the information provided by the government.

These are people who speak neither of the official languages, immigrants who have been here for a number of years and whose children have adjusted well. However, a number of these immigrants have continued to live in their own language and society. Therefore, they cannot be reached through advertising, or through the information that is provided.

These people also include disabled and sick persons. During my consultations and meetings, I met many people who were alone, sick and old. These people often no longer want to fight a system that does not help them. This group also includes, of course, the homeless.

These people, who are the poorest and who have the greatest needs, have been forgotten. Why? Because, instead of attracting them, the system excluded them. Just to obtain the guaranteed income supplement form, one must dial a telephone number and wait for hours to get service. It is true, we checked. The caller is asked to press key No. 1, 2 and 3. In the end, the poor person, who had to fight to get the information, just gives up.

After finally getting service, we are sent a form to fill out, but this form is out of proportion with the service provided by the government. So, these people give up again. The system is designed to forget the elderly and the poor, that is those who need this money the most.

The Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities came to the conclusion that the bureaucratic intricacies were part of the reasons why some of the most disadvantaged members of our society are forgotten almost on purpose.

I have just listed some facts that support this conclusion. Take for example the problems with telephone service; this is an automated service, and seniors do not get to speak to another human being. The telephone service is automated and the voice mailbox system is complex. There are also forms, which are complicated, and publicity that is obviously not working.

Incidentally, I have to admit that publicity is somewhat better now. It has improved, but it is still not very efficient. One liberal member was telling me the other day “I do not know where you find these people that we have forgotten. In my riding, we do a lot of publicity and the people who answer are not forgotten by the system”. Well, of course, when you look where there is nothing to be found, it is quite normal not to find anything.

We cannot rely only on radio, television and newspaper publicity. Publicity has to be done through word of mouth. It must rely on human contact. It must reach those who are difficult to reach for the reasons I gave earlier.

There are also administrative excesses. I have filled forms all my life. When I see the forms sent to the poor people who are often also disadvantaged on the instruction level, people who are alone and often disheartened by the system, these forms are so complicated that it is tantamount to excluding these people from the system on purpose.

There is also conflict of interest. I think that this has played a large role. For eight years now, the government has boosted its fund with $3.2 billion taken from the poorest members of society; $3.2 billion which should have gone to those most in need, to those whose income does not even top $12,648 annually if they are single, and $16,640 if they are living as a couple, whom the government has failed to locate.

The government has saved $3.2 billion on the backs of these disadvantaged citizens. In Quebec alone, some $800 million, close to $1 billion, has been saved and is in the government's coffers. This has helped to wipe out the deficit. All it did was further swell the EI fund which we so often speak about. There is $45 billion in the EI fund, which also belongs to workers, who are certainly not among the richest members of society.

This has gone into the fund, not just to eliminate the deficit, but also to pay down the debt. This debt is not something seniors and the disadvantaged owe. It is wrong to claim that these people must pay down the debt, when they barely have enough for a comfortable old age.

What we discovered was an unspeakable scandal. In every region of Quebec I visited, and even outside Quebec, since I went to Vancouver, I spoke about this issue. It is a scandal.

What makes it worse, Mr. Speaker, is that if the government discovers after the fact that people owe it money, it can collect it for five years back. If an investigation finds that you are at fault, there is full retroactivity.

In the case before us, in Quebec, I found seniors who were owed large amounts, because the information had not been provided, because it had been badly targeted, and because the government was at fault. In Quebec, I found cases where the government owes seniors up to $90,000. In Rimouski, I found someone to whom the government owes $4,000 a year. Similar cases are being found throughout Quebec.

Do you know what kind of answer we get? When we told the government that it owed money to seniors, that we had proof of this, the government told us that the retroactivity was for 11 months. It is keeping money that does not belong to it, that belongs to the poorest members of society. When these people, after going through a terrible hassle, finally get the necessary information, they are told that there is only 11 months of retroactivity.

This is unacceptable. This was also the conclusion of the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities. It is unacceptable to behave this way when dealing with the poorest members of society, those who helped build this country, people to whom we owe so much more than money, to whom we owe recognition and respect. It is unacceptable for them to end up in this type of situation.

The Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities made proposals to the government. We asked the government to simplify the registration procedure, for instance. It is ridiculous that there is such a complicated process to ask for that which one deserves. It makes no sense to use such complicated forms for people who are poor and often worn down by life. When people reach 70, 72, 75 or 80 years of age, they are often tired, sick or depressed, and they do not feel like fighting. When they have to fight against a system that denies them what they deserve, it is depressing.

The Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the Status of Persons with Disabilities also reached the conclusion that retroactivity must go back five years. Retroactivity must be full and total. The government must adopt the same measures when paying out money owed to the poor as they use when collecting the money it is owed.

When I owe income tax to the government, it can go back five, eight or ten years. If I am responsible, I must pay a penalty, and interest on the amount. It makes no sense that when the same thing happens in reverse, to the poorest members of society, when a lady from Sherbrooke realizes that the government owes her $90,000 in guaranteed income supplement, the government says to her “We will only give you 11 months of retroactive benefits”. Yet, if the opposite were to happen, that person would be required to reimburse the government $90,000 in addition to a penalty and interests.

I believe the committee has reached the conclusion that the government must improve the way it is doing things. It must change its procedures. The system must be made as automatic as possible. It makes no sense that a person in need of the guaranteed income supplement must reapply yearly. Everything in possible is being done to exclude people, whereas if they were honest, they would be doing everything possible to include them, if only out of respect for those who built this country.

My colleagues in the Bloc Quebecois and myself will do our utmost to see that this matter is finally settled and that more honest methods are adopted. It is not a matter of charity, but merely of honesty to those in our society who are the least well off.

What would you or I do with $12, 648 a year? If a person has less than that, and is entitled to the GIS but no effort is made to get that money to them, their situation almost defies description.

I have introduced a private member's bill in order to force the government to change its way of doing things and to apply the same approach and the same retroactive period as it does when it owes taxpayers money. It is not true that seniors are responsible for going after the money they are owed. When the government owes them money, it has to pay it back. It will have to show some basic honesty.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

Mr. Speaker, I hope you are not too disappointed that the Montreal Canadians lost last night. We know that your son, Chad Kilger, wears jersey No. 25 for the Montreal Canadians. You will understand that, as a resident of Quebec City, I do not really cry when the Montreal Canadians lose a game.

That being said, I want to congratulate my colleague from Champlain who travelled all through the province last autumn and winter to galvanize the community into action and to raise public awareness.

The whole issue was addressed in an unanimous report tabled by the committee; there was no dissenting opinion. Who is the member who set out on a tour of all the regions in Quebec, pilgrim's staff in hand, and what party does he belong to? He is my colleague in the Bloc Quebecois, the hon. member for Champlain.

I remember when he came to Beauport, in my riding, last March, on his 65th birthday. He is very much concerned about the situation of the elderly, since he can now say: “I am part of that age group”. You could never tell by his mental agility, because I believe that age has nothing to do with it. We sometimes see very young people who are not as keen minded as 75- or 80-year old people. Age has nothing to do with mental agility. I remember wishing happy birthday to my colleague for Champlain.

I have a two-part question for him. First, I would like him to tell the House and every one watching us what support and cooperation he got from civil organizations to ensure that these 68,000 Quebecers could be found.

I remember the meeting that was held in Beauport. In attendance were representatives of FADOQ, the Quebec Federation of Senior Citizens, the local senior citizens club, the Society of Saint-Vincent-de-Paul, the Cercle des fermières, and parish councils from the surrounding area .

There was nothing partisan about that tour, as evidenced by the fact that two civil servants from Human Resources Development Canada came to take notes, to hear what the various groups had to say on this issue, to try to correct a situation that has been going on for too long.

With regard to this first part, I would like my colleague from Champlain to elaborate on the co-operation that he has received from certain groups involved with seniors, with low income Canadians, or from people who are active in their communities. I would like him to elaborate on that.

The second part has to do with information for those who watch our debates on television. I remember a question the member for Frontenac—Mégantic put in the House to the Minister of Human Resources Development. The minister thanked the member—who, incidentally, belongs to the same party as the minister—for taking an interest in this issue.

When our colleague from Champlain directs questions to the Minister of Human Resources Development, they are not what we call planted questions. The minister does not know what the question will be—

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:25 p.m.

Some hon. members

Oh, oh.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:25 p.m.

Bloc

Michel Guimond Bloc Beauport—Montmorency—Côte-De- Beaupré—Île-D'Orléans, QC

That hurts, Mr. Speaker.

The minister does not know in advance what the question will be. When a member of the Bloc Quebecois rises to defend Quebec's interests, the ministers opposite do not have the questions.

It is important to inform the public about that. When a Liberal minister is asked a question by a member of the Liberal majority, let it be known that the question has been forwarded to the minister ahead of time. The answer is written by the minister's assistants. It is known in advance.

I would like my colleague from Champlain to comment on that.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:35 p.m.

The Deputy Speaker

I will resist the temptation to reply to the preliminary remarks relating to this evening's hockey game. It is a matter of relevance. I will therefore give the hon. member for Champlain the floor.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Marcel Gagnon Bloc Champlain, QC

Mr. Speaker, you do well to point that out. I am almost certain that the people I am concerned about are not former hockey players.

I am pleased to be asked this question. Our tour was carried out in collaboration with all my Bloc Quebecois colleagues, and I even offered my services to others outside the party.

I enjoyed the co-operation of all groups and associations of retired persons. We spoke to the FADOQ and the AQDR, and all associations concerned by the issue we raised. These groups have been involved in actions on the local and regional levels. There is, for instance, Fierté Mauricienne, which is going to hire four summer students to seek out these people. I would like to take this opportunity to thank these people for their co-operation. This is what success is all about.

Every year, there is a Christmas tree for the forgotten people. I have always wondered why they are forgotten. Why not stop forgetting them? Why not think of them year round? Then we would not have to organize charity at Christmas time. Perhaps less charity and more honesty is what is needed.

If they are not to be forgotten, we must work with the associations, with those who are familiar with them and can identify them. That is the way it is done in Quebec, and without any partisanship. In the Christmas baskets distributed by Moisson Montréal, Moisson Trois-Rivières and Moisson Québec, we included over 50,000 notices to locate people the Bloc had not managed to identify. The purpose of this was to find and help those in need.

I would like to thank everyone who has helped out. I am sure that, even with their co-operation, things are not finished. I do not want to hear that the problem is settled, as they claim in Verdun. My foot it is. There are $3.2 billion in the government's coffers that belongs to them. We will do our utmost to find these people and to see that the government pays them what is owing.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Monique Guay Bloc Laurentides, QC

Mr. Speaker, I have a short question. When my colleague from Champlain talked about this issue with regard to the elderly, I received numerous phone calls in my riding. Many people were entitled to this benefit, but did not know it. They are often women at home who have trouble understanding the documents.

This document makes no sense whatsoever. It is absolutely unreadable. We even have trouble understanding it, so you can imagine what it must be like for people who are not used to dealing with such documents; it becomes incomprehensible.

I would like my colleague from Champlain to explain what he has done so far to make it easier for these elderly persons to read these documents and submit their application.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:35 p.m.

Bloc

Marcel Gagnon Bloc Champlain, QC

Mr. Speaker, it is too bad that I have so little time to answer.

Indeed, to make it easier for the elderly, we asked certain associations to help them. First, we asked the minister to simplify the form. There has been some improvement in this regard. We also asked all the associations to establish some committees.

I gave the example of Fierté Mauricienne, which will have four students this summer to help the elderly. First, they will find them, tell them what they are entitled to and, finally, help them to fill in the application forms. Then, there will be a follow-up so that these people will not be forgotten once again.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:40 p.m.

Laval West Québec

Liberal

Raymonde Folco LiberalParliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources Development

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to be able to respond to the speeches made by members of one of the opposition parties, to inform the House and the general public of exactly what has happened, and what the government's initiative has been regarding the guaranteed income supplement.

First, I would like to say a word or two about the concern of the government and the Minister of Human Resources Development to respond to the needs of the poor, not only in Quebec, but throughout Canada, and I include Quebec in Canada.

In fact, this government has created several programs to help them. One of them, being discussed today, is the guaranteed income supplement. It is an amount given by the government to help people who have an extremely small income. This amount is added to the benefits paid out by the Canada pension plan.

The purpose of the guaranteed income supplement is, as its name indicates, to help reduce the poverty rate among seniors. This is a purpose that is important to highlight, because this government is committed to this.

For the benefit of those listening, I would like to add that the percentage of low income seniors is decreasing. This is partly due to the fact that the Canadian economy is doing better and better. Allow me to provide some figures.

One senior in 12 needed the guaranteed income supplement in 1999, compared to one in five in 1980. This is a figure that demonstrates that seniors are better off today than they were 20 years ago.

This is not to say that seniors do not have problems. That is not what I am saying, to the contrary. We know that some people need this supplement. This is why the supplement exists, and it will continue to exist as long as it is needed.

The government wants all seniors who are eligible for the guaranteed income supplement to receive the benefits. We know that there was a lack of information among the general public, and we acted very swiftly to meet this information need.

Let me take a few minutes to clearly explain to the House what this government did to inform the people. The government is required to do so and it met that requirement.

For example, since February, more than 30,000 documents have been sent to the eligible seniors in Quebec, to inform them about the guaranteed income supplement; I am talking about Quebec since all the members who have raised the issue up until now were from that province. Of these 30,000 documents, 23,500 were application forms sent by the department and 6,300 were letters sent by the the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, for Quebec.

This is why I say that two departments are responsible. Thanks to the co-operation, thet partnership with the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, we can identify seniors with a very low income, since the agency gives us data on the income tax paid by these individuals.

However, and that is extremely important, we abide by the law, which prevents us from intruding into the private lives of citizens. This is why it was hard to get the information. Until now, we have been unable to match the data from Human Resources Development Canada to the data from the Canada Customs and Revenue Agency, in order to know how much income tax was paid by certain individuals. However, we have been able to find out about the income tax without contravening the Privacy Act. So that is one measure we took. I must say that 30,000 documents is no mean feat.

Second, and this is very important, we obtained the partnership, co-operation and help of the Conseil régional de l'âge d'or, not only through its main office but also through its regional branches throughout Quebec, to organize conferences given either by the minister, myself or officials of the Department of Human Resources Development of Canada who work in those regions.

So we used what Americans call the outreach approach, which means that there were special, particular and specific initiatives to go into all the regions of Quebec to allow people to get the information.

We also distributed the information at various activities, in community health centres, to senior organizations and volunteers who help these people to fill out their income tax return. Clearly, some people have difficulty understanding all the details contained in these returns, which can be complicated for certain people.

However, we specifically sought the co-operation of people who do this kind of volunteer work and organizations that work with these persons, so that they could pass the information on to those who need it. I am thinking here not only of seniors who may already be sick or in dire straits, but also the illiterate who have trouble reading an income tax return.

We also contacted some 2,000 service providers and senior groups. I will name only two, since the list is very long. There was the Fédération des centres d'action bénévole du Québec and the Conseil des aînés du Québec. The list being quite long, I will not read it in the House.

All of that to say that the Canadian government assumed its responsibilities. It is aware that there are difficulties with the guaranteed income supplement and with the information that must be given to the public. The government acted rapidly and took steps so that the information could reach people and that they could understand how the system operates and file their own applications.

Second, I would like to remind my colleagues on the other side that when those efforts were made by the minister, the member for Champlain stated, and I quote:

The minister has made efforts to locate these people.

That is, people who did not know about the guaranteed income supplement. Let me continue:

For example, she sends letters to those who are not collecting the guaranteed income supplement, or even the old age pension.

There are some 65,000 people not even collecting the old age pension, and the minister has made an effort.

That is what the MP for Champlain had to say. Clearly, in spite of their invective, even the party opposite recognizes--grudgingly, but this is normal--that this government made an effort and succeeded in its effort to reach the public, since most people now know what they can do to get the guaranteed income supplement.

My colleague also spoke about retroactivity. IIf I may, I shall say a few words about this very important point.

The problem is that my colleague would like retroactivity to go back, obviously--as the term indicates--ad vitam aeternam. Clearly, that is not possible. We suggested that retroactivity be for 11 months before the application, plus the month in which the application was submitted, for a total of 12 months.

As my colleagues pride themselves on representing a certain government here in the House, I would like to bring to their attention several programs of the Quebec government.

For example, there are no retroactive payments in the employment assistance program, the provincial program run by the Quebec government.

Second, there are no retroactive payments in the Quebec rent subsidy program.

Third, there are no retroactive payments in the low cost housing program.

Fourth, there are no retroactive payments in the housing allowance program.

I am not saying that we should not make any retroactive payments, on the contrary. I think that the government has acted properly. It showed how much it cared for the seniors and recognized the difficult situation they were in and it granted 11 months of retroactive payments, which is 11 months more than what the provincial government is giving, this government that is so close to the member opposite who represents a riding from Quebec, where I also come from.

Finally, I would add that the fact that the individuals had no access to the information or did not know how to request the guaranteed income supplement is not a problem unique to Quebec. The members opposite who are from Quebec should not think that there is a movement against them. On the contrary, this was a weakness in the system. We admit it. This weakness has had an impact across Canada.

To give the House a couple of bits of information, we have sent all across Canada 4.5 million information sheets with the T4 statements. I do not want to bother the members with figures, but I do want to emphasize that this is now a thing of the past. We have recognized that there was a flaw in the system. Unfortunately, this happens in any system. We have reacted. We reacted quickly and we wanted to show once more how concerned the government was about the economic well-being of Canadians. This is what we have done.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:50 p.m.

Bloc

Monique Guay Bloc Laurentides, QC

Mr. Speaker, I think we should set the record straight.

If the Bloc Quebecois had not discovered this issue, if we had not looked into it, if we had not managed to find out that so many elderly were not getting the guaranteed income supplement, the government would not have done anything. The government is defending its position on retroactivity by pointing to the fact that retroactivity is not recognized at the provincial level. That is not the point.

The point is that elderly people living on minimum incomes, people who are already in dire straits, did not and will not get retroactive payments, even though their application has been on file for five years. Imagine what it was like for these people who, for five years, could not benefit from these amounts, which were essential to their survival. These people are often older women living alone at home, including widows. They are barely surviving, but the government will not give them the guaranteed income supplement. It will not pay them retroactively.

The federal government must stop defending itself by blaming the provinces. The issue is a federal one. With all due respect to the hon. member opposite—we both sit on the Standing Committee on Human Resources Development—whenever we raise an issue here in Ottawa, and it is often the Bloc Quebecois that does it, because it has a great social conscience, whenever we propose a positive measure for the public, the government always pulls the rug out from under our feet. This is unacceptable.

We present to this government proposals that are sensible, honest and fair to the public. And what does the government say? Nothing. It does nothing.

If we had not taken action regarding this issue, if we had not continued to take action regarding the forms, the same old thing would have happened again. This does not make any sense. It is because the Bloc Quebecois has acted that the government has no choice. It has to do something.

They can say all they want in this House, but I am proud of what we did and we will continue to do it. I hope that the member opposite will support us. We do not want to engage in petty politics on this issue. This is an important and priority issue. The government must put all its energy into it. These people are entitled to retroactivity and the government must pay. There is no other option.

Committees of the HouseRoutine Proceedings

12:55 p.m.

Liberal

Raymonde Folco Liberal Laval West, QC

Mr. Speaker, I did not want to blame the provinces for anything. It seems to me that 99% of what I just said dealt precisely with what the federal government, the Government of Canada, this government has been doing to correct a flaw in the system. Unfortunately, there are often flaws in systems.

We realized there was a major flaw in the system, but it was not thanks to the members opposite. It was thanks to the work done by the House of Commons Standing Committee on Human Resources Development, which revealed that information based on what was said by witnesses who appeared before us. The hon. member is a member of that committee, as I am.

Clearly, there was a flaw in the system. Now we are looking ahead. Our responsibility is to seek ways to correct that flaw and to help people understand the system, so that they can have access to the money they are entitled to. We are not talking about charity here, but about money people are entitled to. This is what we have done.