Debates of June 15th, 2006

Questions on the Order Paper

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

Is that agreed?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Deputy Speaker, NDP, Bill Blaikie]

Before proceeding to orders of the day, I wish to inform the House that because of the ministerial statements government orders will be extended by 39 minutes.

Opposition Motion—Seniors

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

moved:

That, in the opinion of the House, the government should rectify decades of underfunding of seniors programs by: (a) creating a Seniors Charter that recognizes older Canadians as creative, active and valued members of our society, and that this Charter shall enshrine the right of every senior living in Canada to the following: (i) income security, through protected pensions and indexed public income support that provides a reasonable state of economic welfare; (ii) housing, through secure accessible, and affordable housing; (iii) wellness, through health promotion and preventative care; (iv) health care, through secure, public, accessible, universal health care including primary care, dental care, homecare, palliative and geriatric care, and pharmacare; (v) self-development, through lifelong access to affordable recreation, education and training, (vi) government services, through timely access to all federal government services and programs, including family re-unification; and (b) creating a Seniors Advocate to: (i) conduct public education and awareness initiatives on the rights of seniors; (ii) ensure that all new or revised policies and programs affecting seniors receive public input from older persons; (iii) require that all new policies and programs affecting seniors are announced with specific timelines for implementation; (iv) act as an Ombudsman for seniors with respect to all government services and programs making recommendations as appropriate and that this Seniors Advocate publish and report annually to Parliament on government policies and programs affecting seniors, including the effectiveness of federal funding related to the needs of older persons.

Mr. Speaker, let me begin this morning's debate on my opposition day motion by thanking my leader, the hon. member for Toronto—Danforth, for providing me with this amazing opportunity to speak to the importance of seniors to Canada's socio-economic fabric.

As members in the House will know, opportunities for opposition members to propose and actually debate their policy positions are rare. In fact, in this entire first sitting of Parliament, New Democrats only have two opportunities to bring forward opposition day motions. For my leader and the entire NDP caucus to agree that seniors' issues were so important that they needed to be discussed in one of these rare opportunities, speaks to the profound commitment that our party has to ensuring that the concerns of older adults are being heard and addressed in the single most important democratic institution in our country, in the House of Commons.

Let us be clear, while we may be thinking about these issues today in terms of our parents and grandparents, our handling of their concerns will affect not just them, but also our generation and that of our children.

As UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said, at the launching of the International Year of Older Persons on October 1, 1998, we must move toward “a society that does not caricature older persons as pensioners, but sees them as both agents and beneficiaries of development”. Eight years later, we still have a long way to go in achieving that goal in Canada. I am hopeful that my motion will move the yardstick in a meaningful way toward realizing that international objective.

Let me begin by explaining the details of my motion, the rationale behind its key components and the desired effect of adopting the motion today. Unfortunately, my time to do so is limited, but since our party recognizes the importance of seniors' issues in all aspects of policy-making, my colleagues will continue to speak after me about the motion in the specific context of their own critic portfolios as well as their own legislative initiatives that will live up to the commitments we make to seniors through the charter today.

First and foremost, the motion builds on the incredible work done in the last Parliament by my colleague the member for Windsor West in recognizing that seniors have the right to a fulfilling life with dignity, respect and security. Moreover, the motion recognizes that it is the responsibility of government to protect those rights and freedoms of the aging in our society.

To that end, my motion begins by advocating for the adoption of a seniors charter for Canadians that would enshrine six specific rights into law.

First, every senior in Canada has the right to income security. In a series of polls conducted by the Canadian Labour Congress in 2004, 73% of Canadians polled said they worried about not having enough income to live after retirement, up by almost 20% from two years before.

Canadians are worried about the solvency of their private pensions, the adequacy of both CPP and public income support and their ability to cope with what Statistics Canada confirms is a higher inflation rate for seniors and for the average Canadian, and those fears are well founded.

Since the middle 1990s, the income of seniors has reached a ceiling and the gap between the revenues of seniors and those of other Canadians is now increasing. According to the government's own National Advisory Council on Aging, between 1997 and 2003, the mean income of senior households increased by $4,100, while the average income of other Canadian households increased by $9,000. The situation is even more pronounced for seniors living alone.

In total, over a quarter million seniors live under the low income cutoff line or, as we more commonly say, live below the poverty line. In my home town of Hamilton, the poverty rate for seniors is a staggering 24%. For unattached seniors, that rate rises to 45% among men and an unbelievable 58% of women.

It should further be noted that private retirement savings are concentrated in a small percentage of families. According to Statistics Canada, 25% of families hold 84% of these assets, while three out of ten families have no private pensions at all.

While income security for seniors thus needs to include pension protection, the real solution lies in an indexed public income support system that provides a reasonable state of economic welfare. Our seniors' charter enshrines that right in the law. Our charter also recognizes, however, that economic vulnerability is not only about insufficiency of income, but also about the loss of dignity and social inclusion.

There are few definitions of economic vulnerability, but its opposite, economic security, has been defined by the Canadian Council on Social Development:

Economic security refers to an assured and stable standard of living that provides individuals and families with a level of resources and benefits necessary to participate economically, politically, socially, culturally, and with dignity in their community's activities.

In other words, security requires not just a sufficient income, but also a level of dignity and social inclusion. Thus, our seniors charter also addresses issues of health and wellness, housing, self-development through lifelong learning, and access to government services and programs. Let me briefly touch on each of these.

With respect to housing, it is worth noting that the overwhelming majority of seniors live in a private residence as opposed to a health care institution, 93% versus 7%. Contrary to stereotypes, most seniors are active and independent contributors to our society. Paying for shelter is a major expense for seniors. According to the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, in 2001 more than half of seniors living on their own in rental accommodation were in core housing need. That is to say that 30% of their income or more was not sufficient to pay the median rent for housing of an acceptable size and quality in their location. In fact, many seniors are currently paying between 50% and 90% of their income on housing. After the federal government froze investments in social housing in 1993, the availability of rental units dropped sharply in large cities. As a result, rental costs soared and the quality of lodging decreased.

The United Nations charter of rights recognizes shelter as a guaranteed right. It is time for Canada to act on that guarantee by enshrining into law the right of every senior to secure, accessible and affordable housing. I am pleased to say that our seniors charter does precisely that.

The same is true of health care. All too often politicians pay lip service during election campaigns to the universality of Canadian health care, but then once in office conveniently blame their draconian decisions on the financial burden placed on the system by our aging population. The reality is that health care is not being drained by our seniors. In fact, the consensus of expert opinion suggests that aging will add only 1% to 2% annually to health care costs over ensuing years, an increase that is quite manageable. New drugs and technologies are keeping people healthier longer and there is an increased awareness among people about the benefits of active, healthy lifestyles.

To that end, our seniors charter adds wellness in addition to health care as a right of every senior living in Canada. If we focus up front on health promotion and preventative care, not only will seniors be able to continue to engage in active participation in all facets of life, but the cost on our health care system will also be contained. By keeping people healthier through a cleaner environment, greater food safety, better diets, better home supports and a more holistic approach to health care, we can improve the health of our nation and realize significant savings on the acute care side.

We must ensure that the Canadian health care system as a whole, including primary care, home care, geriatric and palliative care, as well as pharmacare, complies with the five conditions of the Canada Health Act not just in law but in spirit. There should be no back door measures to privatized health care where the size of one's wallet determines when and whether one receives care. Canadian health care must be publicly administered, comprehensive, universal, portable and accessible. These rights are reinforced and detailed in our charter for every senior living in Canada.

Our charter recognizes for the first time the right of every senior in Canada to free dental care. Dental associations right across the country recognize that good oral health is a determinant of good overall health. With the two inextricably linked, it is inconceivable that a charter which enshrines health care as a fundamental right would not also include dental care. I am proud that my motion takes that important step in the health promotion of older adults.

The enhanced wellness of seniors as well as new drugs and medical technologies will continue to enhance their longevity. Already, older adults are continuing to make important contributions to our country's socio-economic fabric for an average of an additional 20 years. We must support and maximize this opportunity for engagement by ensuring that seniors can participate in continuous self-development through affordable recreation and lifelong education and training.

We need to formally recognize that the expertise and experience of older adults is unique and crucial for exchanging knowledge between generations. This is often referred to as intergenerational solidarity. In other words, how much we invest in educational programs and other learning environments for our seniors will directly correlate with how much seniors can give back to the other age groups. Not only is this a benefit to Canada as a whole, but it increases participation among seniors and reduces feelings of being marginalized, a key component of security as I have outlined above.

Last, these commitments made in the charter must be backed up by a commitment to ensure that seniors have timely access to all federal government services and programs.

In the absence of a cabinet minister directly responsible for seniors, it is essential that there be a coordinated system where seniors can learn about and receive help with the variety of income support, health, housing, family reunification, education and other initiatives available to them. If seniors cannot access the programs and services that were designed for them, then those programs and services are not worth the paper they are written on.

That brings me to the last element of my opposition day motion. Rights that cannot be accessed are no rights at all. It is essential that these rights be promoted and enforced. To that end, our motion calls for the creation of a seniors advocate.

Since the government has refused to appoint a minister for seniors, someone who actually sits at the cabinet table and participates in decision making, it is essential that the charter be brought to life by someone else who has the ability to report annually to Parliament and to make recommendations about the adequacy and efficacy of federal government programs and services with respect to seniors. To that end, we are envisioning that the seniors advocate would fulfill five crucial functions.

First, she would conduct public education and awareness initiatives on the rights of seniors. For example, as recently as 2001, over 200,000 Canadian seniors were unaware that they were legitimately entitled to receive the GIS, the guaranteed income supplement. Effective outreach can decrease these numbers dramatically. It would be the role of the seniors advocate to identify these areas and develop strategies for informing seniors of their rights.

Second, it is essential that older adults be directly involved in designing policies and programs that affect them. The seniors advocate would be mandated to ensure that this crucial component of seniors engagement be acted upon by the government.

Third, it is important that all new policies and programs affecting seniors are announced with specific timelines for implementation. After 13 years of broken promises on everything from a pharmacare program to affordable housing and enhanced income security, seniors are tired of election rhetoric. They want and deserve to know that plans are being announced with specific timetables for action. The seniors advocate would ensure that that would happen.

Last, the seniors advocate would act as an ombudsperson for older persons, a one stop access point for seniors to access information and seek redress on all government services and programs affecting them.

The seniors advocate would then report annually to Parliament on all of her advocacy and policy work so that there would be real accountability on the government's agenda for seniors.

Seniors have worked hard all of their lives. They have played by the rules. Now they simply want access to the programs and services that their hard-earned tax dollars helped build. These programs are essential to their full participation in Canadian society. They allow seniors to retire with the dignity and respect they deserve.

As politicians, we have an obligation to make that happen. It is time that we abandoned partisan rhetoric and acted as one to stand up for our seniors. I urge all members of the House to support our motion so that together we can protect the rights and freedoms of the aging in our society.

[Sukh Dhaliwal, Liberal, Newton—North Delta, BC]

Mr. Speaker, first of all I would like to congratulate the NDP for bringing forward this motion which will play catch-up with the policies for seniors that were brought in by the Liberals.

In fact, I would not agree with the member when she said that nothing was done for 13 years. If she looks at the 13 year record for seniors, the percentage of lower income seniors dropped from 11% to 5.6% in 2004.

At the same time I have trouble with the progressive party of Tommy Douglas, Ed Broadbent, Audrey McLaughlin, and even the member for Halifax who has obviously been progressive. That party is getting away from those values and is sacrificing those values for political gain.

I will support this motion, but at the same time I have trouble when it comes to the partisan policies and that party's support for the same Conservatives that want regression for our seniors.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member's support.

I do think we disagree on the economic well-being of seniors in our country right now. We know that as of 2004 about one-third of seniors, most of whom were single women, were dependent on OAS and GIS. They were living on about $12,400 a year. The low income cutoff is $17,000 a year. We are forcing seniors to live in poverty.

It was the Liberal government that was in office at the time. Yes, there was a small increase to the GIS, but the reality is we are forcing more and more seniors into poverty because what we are offering them in terms of public income support is not enough to keep up with the increasing cost of living.

Frankly, Statistics Canada confirms that the cost of living rises more for seniors than it does for any other part of the population. We need to take this seriously. We need to address it today. Collectively as members of this House we have a responsibility to do that. We have an opportunity to do it by supporting this motion today.

[Paule Brunelle, Bloc, Trois-Rivières, QC]

Mr. Speaker, the motion speaks of the respect and security to which seniors are entitled, particularly older women. I agree and I am in favour of this. However, this motion really bothers me because of phrases such as “underfunding of seniors programs”. That is true. Action is also called for in the sectors of health and pharmacare, with recreation, education, training and families also mentioned. Thus, I would ask the member how will she reconcile all this with provincial jurisdiction? We must remember that these are areas of provincial jurisdiction.

For years, the Bloc Québécois has made demands regarding the guaranteed income supplement. The federal government has never properly seen to the interests of seniors and now it wants to cover such a vast array of items with this motion to solve problems not within its jurisdiction.

We would be happy with a transfer of the required funds, no strings attached, so that the government closest to seniors could deal with the difficulties they experience.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I certainly understand some of the difficulties in our country when jurisdiction for things like health care is actually divided between the provincial and the federal governments, but we do have a Canada Health Act. Canadians do have a right to access to health care, the same in St. John's, Newfoundland as in Victoria, B.C. We should not have two standards of care anywhere in our country.

Canadians do not want us to engage in finger pointing saying that it is the responsibility of the provincial government and we do not need to do anything, or it is the responsibility of the federal government. Seniors deserve more than for us to pass the buck. We need to take responsibility. We were elected to this House to address the concerns of our constituents and it is not good enough to say that this is provincial responsibility. We have a role, we have it through the Canada Health Act.

We have a ton of opportunities to make a meaningful difference in the lives of seniors. I want us to seize that opportunity and run with it today.

[Laurie Hawn, Conservative, Edmonton Centre, AB]

Mr. Speaker, I want to applaud the very sincere and articulate presentation by my hon. friend in the NDP. As all members of the House do, I share her concern for seniors issues. I am not a senior yet, but I can see it from where I am.

We did take some positive measures in budget 2006. Clearly people would like us to do more and I appreciate that. We are still working on establishing a national seniors council which is similar to the body the member talked about.

I do have one question. There is always the matter of what things will cost. It is not a combative question, but I would like to know if the member has costed out the program. Does she have an estimate of what the programs she has outlined would cost?

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, we have costed out most of the aspects of our proposed seniors charter. Obviously this charter is a statement of principle. It engages in six particular areas. There are elements, for example, the free dental care, the free prescription drugs, the national housing strategy, all of which we have costed out. In terms of implementing all of the specifics of the principles, obviously that would be up to the government to decide as it would have to take primary responsibility for the implementation.

[Guy André, Bloc, Berthier—Maskinongé, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I was listening to the hon. member and I found this motion very surprising.

I was a CLSC social worker for a number of years, for 20 years, before I came here. In Quebec, and throughout the country, the population is aging. Our society is getting older. The home support services provided through the CLSCs and our entire system in Quebec need resources and money.

In my opinion, the solution does not lie in developing or enhancing federal structures. The solution lies more along the lines of transferring the federal government's surplus to Quebec, to the other provinces and to the territories so that they can provide more services and enhanced services to the public and to seniors. In Quebec, this is done through the CLSCs.

I have trouble understanding this motion. When the hon. member says she wants us to invest in education and health and so on, this means giving more money to the federal government to provide the services.

In Quebec, we have our health care system. We need more resources, both financial and human, in order to provide services directly to the people in our province. It is not a matter of enhancing other structures. Our structures already exist and need financial resources.

I would have preferred a motion that would have allocated more transfers for health to the provinces and Quebec so that they can provide more services for the growing needs of the public.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I do not think anybody in this House would disagree that provinces would not benefit hugely from additional transfers from the federal government. In fact, there has been significant underfunding for the last 13 years. In part, that is what this motion is trying to redress.

While I appreciate that the member is suggesting that all the surplus money should go into Quebec, I would suggest there are other members in this House who think we should share the wealth and actually create universality of programs right across the country. That is what this motion would intend to do.

Seniors in every part of this country have a right to decent health care, lifelong learning, affordable housing, income security, and that would be the purpose of this charter.

[Bill Siksay, NDP, Burnaby—Douglas, BC]

Mr. Speaker, last Saturday six members of the B.C. NDP federal caucus visited the riding of Esquimalt—Juan de Fuca. One of the things we did was to meet with seniors organizations. One of the people I met was Mrs. Janette George of the Retired Teachers' Association of the greater Victoria area. One of the key things that she wanted to raise was the question of elder abuse.

We know that today is Elder Abuse Awareness Day. My colleague from Hamilton Mountain raised that in the House yesterday and called on the government to proclaim elder abuse as a federal awareness day.

The folks from the Retired Teachers' Association noted that seniors were vulnerable to all kinds of abuse from outside and inside their families, by family members, by spouses, by institutions and the mental health system. There is often pressure to move them out of their homes and into institutions. Some of the services to help with this are really lacking. Something like the seniors help line has a long waiting time and often the services provided are from individuals, not necessarily from groups. This was a real area that they wanted to see the government show some leadership.

I am wondering if my colleague could comment on that.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his commitment to doing everything he can to eradicate elder abuse.

This is a crime that has often been called “the hidden crime” in Canada because so many elderly people are afraid to report when they have been the subject of neglect or abuse. Oftentimes that actually may happen at the hands of family members. There is a fear a reprisals and a fear of consequences. In fact, sometimes there is a sense of shame, among seniors. This is an issue that we need to address.

I asked the Minister of Canadian Heritage whether we could proclaim, as a first step in raising awareness on this issue, today national elder abuse awareness day. Unfortunately, that request was declined. I am still optimistic that as members of the House, we can work jointly to make that happen before the end of today.

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development]

Mr. Speaker, I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for St. John's East.

I am pleased to have this opportunity to speak today to the motion presented by the hon. member for Hamilton Mountain. Today's seniors have witnessed unprecedented changes in their lifetimes: depression and war, good times and bad times, and wave after wave of new technology. Through it all, they have worked hard, raised their families and built our communities. They saved for their future and paid their taxes to support public pensions, and when they entered their golden years, they have relied on those pensions and savings to be there for them when they needed it.

Today's seniors lead more vital and active lives than ever before. If Canadian seniors are generally better off today than in past generations, it is partly because parties of all stripes have been committed to securing retirement income in Canada.

Today our government is committed to protect those gains for all of our seniors by securing and building on our pension system. Conservative governments have done their part over the past 70 years to build our public pension system and we will honour those commitments.

Let me assure the House that the Government of Canada is committed to seeing all Canadian seniors treated with dignity and respect, the respect and dignity that they deserve in every aspect of their lives. Canadian seniors have spent their entire lives helping to build this country through their hard work. This government is proud to stand up for them and ensure their social and economic well-being. We recognize and respect the vast and varied contributions that seniors in Canada have made and continue to make.

The riding of Blackstrap, which I represent, includes a very vibrant and active seniors community. Last fall during Saskatchewan's centennial celebrations, I went to each and every one of the seniors residences and homes, such as: Zemer Court, Scott Forget Towers, Legion Manor, Ilarion, McClure Manor, St. Volodymyr, Elim Lodge, Luther Riverside Terrace, Emmanuel Village, Circle Drive Place, Extendicare Preston and Sunnyside.

Having this many seniors homes in my riding tells me that we are on the right track with seniors. We are helping them to enjoy good retirements and we are providing very good accommodations. Many of them are very faith based and have quality lives in these residences. I can generally say that seniors are among the most politically active and knowledgeable. Many times I have been challenged by different residents.

Across the country during the month of June many regions of Canada are celebrating seniors through a special week or month. Seniors who have given so much of themselves deserve to be treated with the respect that they are due. When they are trying to get information about pensions or other government programs, it is not acceptable for them to be ignored, treated rudely or stuck in voicemail when they are trying to get answers to their questions.

To further ensure there is accountability for how seniors are treated and to ensure that seniors have a voice in government policy decisions, our government will appoint a national seniors council. The seniors council will be made up of seniors and representatives of seniors organizations to advise the minister responsible for seniors on significant issues affecting them.

Canada's seniors make up the fastest growing population in Canadian society. In the decades to come, the proportion of Canadians over the age of 64 is expected to almost double from 13% in 2001 to 24% in 2031. We want to be ready for this unprecedented rate of growth and have policies, programs and services in place that meet the changing needs of seniors today and in the future.

As the lead federal department for seniors, Human Resources and Social Development Canada works together with the provincial, territorial governments and other partners to ensure the well-being of all Canadian seniors.

Hon. members will be familiar with some of the numerous programs and services that the provinces and territories have available for seniors. Allow me to demonstrate some of the concrete ways that the Government of Canada is addressing the particular needs and concerns of seniors.

First and foremost, we are committed to maintaining the Canada pension plan, the old age security plan, and the guaranteed income supplement. These are and will remain fundamental guarantees of income security for seniors in their retirement years. As the House may know, Canada's retirement income system is recognized internationally as one of the finest in the world.

As part of our commitment to the continued sustainability of Canada's income security system, we will be working with the provinces to examine the possibility of allocating a portion of future federal surpluses to the Canada and Quebec pension plans. This would allow the unplanned surpluses to be used for the future benefit of Canadians.

Seniors in Canada today receive more than $50 billion a year in direct income through the Canada pension plan and old age security benefits. Over 4 million seniors are receiving old age security benefits and more that 3 million are receiving Canada pension plan retirement pensions.

Our 2006 budget proposes an increase to the maximum amount eligible for the pension income credit to $2,000, effective this year. This measure will benefit nearly 2.7 million taxpayers with pension incomes and it will remove approximately 85,000 pensioners from the tax rolls.

Furthermore, effective July 1, the GST will be reduced by 1%. This tax cut will help all seniors to save all year round with every purchase they make.

Public transit is often the only means of transportation for seniors. Our government has provided relief in budget 2006 by making transit passes and tickets tax deductible. This measure will encourage public transit use by providing $150 million in 2006-07 and $220 million in 2007-08 in benefits to approximately 2 million Canadians who make a sustained commitment to use this environmentally friendly mode of transportation. All transit users, including commuters, students and seniors will qualify and benefit.

As I noted earlier, our recognition of seniors' past, present and future contributions is founded in a deep and abiding respect. We are committed to seeing all Canadian seniors live in comfort and dignity. We will protect and ensure their well-being.

[Chris Charlton, NDP, Hamilton Mountain, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I welcome the parliamentary secretary's participation in this debate.

I have a specific concern about one area where I have not seen much progress and which is of huge concern to seniors in my community. As the minister will know, when people are eligible for the GIS, they actually have to apply to get that benefit. For many seniors in my community, in the first instance they may not be aware that they need to apply. They often are not aware that they need to reapply. Language and other things are barriers.

Yet, we have a system in place for this very fundamental income support where seniors can only claim retroactively for 11 months. This is a huge disadvantage for seniors, not just in my community of Hamilton Mountain but right across the country.

Similarly, if someone is late applying for their Canada pension plan benefit, they can only claim that retroactively for 11 months. This is not the government's money. CPP is being contributed to by employers and employees. That retroactivity of 11 months is outrageous.

Can the minister let me know what her government thinks about addressing those very real concerns about our income support system that could make an immediate difference for seniors in my community today?

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member bringing that up because that was a real issue in the last Parliament. It was one of the measures that we wanted to bring forward. It should be automatic that the guaranteed income supplement should be a direct mailing of the application forms and there should be information campaigns and partnerships to try to contact vulnerable communities of seniors who are difficult to reach.

Each year about 1.3 million GIS recipients whose tax returns confirm eligibility are automatically renewed. There should not be any problems with the renewals, nor should they have to do it every year. It should be automatic. I could not agree more with the member.

On the retroactivity, it is in line with the other pension plans or other programs. We are staying in line with that so we can sustain the income program that is there.

We are committed to making a concerted effort to inform all potential recipients of their eligibility for the benefit and we will continue to undertake extensive outreach to these seniors.

[Nicole Demers, Bloc, Laval, QC]

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to hear my colleague say that.

I would like to know more about what she intends to do to inform seniors of their right to the guaranteed income supplement and to the Canada pension plan.

The previous government employed entities that were not used by seniors very much. It was difficult to locate seniors who were entitled to the guaranteed income supplement.

Does she intend to pay the seniors full retroactivity on the guaranteed income supplement, as was unanimously agreed upon in a vote here in this House?

[Lynne Yelich, Conservative, Blackstrap, SK]

Mr. Speaker, again, I appreciate that question. We are using the direct mailing of the application forms. There are information campaigns and partnerships trying to contact these communities and seniors who are difficult to reach. Each year there are recipients who, through their tax returns, confirm their eligibility, and they are automatically renewed.

It is an undertaking. It will be extensive. We welcome any suggestions about where there are perhaps some gaps that we should be aware of, and we will certainly try to help so that the seniors are duly served.

[Norman Doyle, Conservative, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to say a few words on this motion. It is a very important motion that calls upon Parliament to address some issues that have been neglected for a very long time.

Seniors' issues are very important and we should all be supportive of policies that are directed toward seniors. If we are lucky enough and if we live long enough, all of us without exception will become seniors. Some of us in this House are already seniors. It is inevitable that we will all find ourselves in that position. In addition, of course, we have to be very respectful and very caring of the people who have gone before us in building our communities, building our society, and making their own unique contribution to the betterment of all.

The motion covers a very wide range of issues. It talks about creating a seniors charter so that the rights of every senior would be enshrined to ensure they receive adequate support in a number of areas. The member mentioned a number of areas in her motion that are very important to seniors, such as income security, indexed pensions, affordable housing, wellness through health promotion, dental care, palliative care, pharmacare, and affordable recreation. These are all important issues for seniors generally, and in enshrining all of these and in developing these programs, seniors themselves would have the opportunity to have input.

As I said, all of us without exception can look at this kind of list and say that we support these measures because they are very laudable goals that should be pursued on behalf of seniors. I am particularly pleased with some of the initiatives that the government has already taken on a number of these issues.

As a government, we realize the dilemma in which many seniors find themselves today. Many are on fixed incomes, but still the cost of living continues to go up. The cost of electricity is forever on the rise. The cost of home heating fuel is always going up. In these two particular areas, I think it would mean an awful lot to seniors who have to live on a fixed income if they could have some kind of guarantee that their electricity bill would be reasonable or that home heating fuel would not go up by 50%, 60% or 70%, as it has over the last couple of years. If these costs were to remain stable, it would mean an awful lot to the average senior.

Of course, today we have to talk about drugs and medical care for some seniors. The costs for these can be draining for an individual on a fixed income. Seniors very often have to go to family members to get help. That should not be happening in this day and age.

I believe that every now and then we have to assure seniors that certain government benefits are guaranteed and will always be guaranteed. I am talking about things like the Canada pension plan, old age security and the guaranteed income supplement. These are fundamental guarantees of income security in retirement years. We as a government have to assure seniors for their own mental well-being that we will not reduce these benefits in any way, shape or form. As a matter of fact, not only do we have to assure seniors that we will not reduce these benefits, but we have to give them some assurance that we will build on these benefits to ensure that seniors maintain a decent and respectable quality of life.

I am encouraged that a move is afoot which would see the federal government working with the provinces to examine the possibility of allocating a portion of any future surpluses to the Quebec and Canada pension plans. What better way to allocate additional moneys than for government to put these surpluses into these plans?

Seniors were very much a part of creating the good times that we enjoy today. Why should they not be the recipients of these good times as well? After all, seniors have sacrificed to pay into the pension plans for their retirement years. As a result, they certainly deserve to keep a greater portion of their hard-earned money to put into additional disposable income.

That is why in its budget the government is helping seniors in what I feel is a variety of different ways. In the budget, the amount of pension income that can be deducted from income tax went from $1,000 to $2,000. About 2.7 million taxpayers will be affected positively by that measure. In addition, it is going to take about 85,000 pensioners off the tax rolls altogether. That is a positive step. Hopefully we can look forward to other measures along these lines when subsequent budgets are brought down.

Of course, we are all very much aware that the GST will be reduced by 1% effective July 1. There is a promise of a further 1% within a five year period. Albeit the average senior is not going to be able to bank too much money from that, but it will be a saving on every purchase that a senior makes.

All these measures mean savings for seniors, of course, but I really believe there is a measure the government is currently working on that would mean a great deal for seniors, an initiative that would truly send a message to the average senior and would reinforce our commitment to seniors. That is the establishment of a national seniors council.

I am aware that the government is working toward that goal. It would be a council made up of seniors and seniors' organizations. That body would have a mandate to advise government on the needs and concerns of seniors all across the country. In addition, of course, seniors would have the comfort of knowing they have their own organization that reports directly to government on issues that affect them.

I noticed in the motion that the member would like to see an ombudsman for seniors put in place, who would report annually to Parliament and make recommendations on issues related to seniors. I think that would be a very good idea. However, I believe that when we put in place a national seniors council, which the government is determined to do, this body would report on issues related to seniors and, although I do not know, it probably would negate the necessity for an ombudsman.

The opposition motion also talks about education and training for seniors with respect to programs for seniors and issues that affect seniors generally. Education and training are very important in raising the awareness of issues that affect seniors. For instance, I am aware that the federal, provincial and territorial ministers responsible for seniors, along with the RCMP, have produced a public education kit to help seniors' organizations raise the visibility of elder abuse. The whole issue of elder abuse is a very important issue. The government provides about $7 million in permanent annual funding for an initiative on elder abuse, which is good as well.

[Irene Mathyssen, NDP, London—Fanshawe, ON]

Mr. Speaker, I was quite interested in what the hon. member had to say but I would point out that this is an issue that cannot wait for a next budget or a budget after that. This issue should have been addressed in the current government's budget but, quite clearly, it was not.

There is a real concern around the ability of seniors to afford their housing. In the budget that the governing party put together this spring there was one time money for affordable housing, money that, I must point out, was appropriated in 2005 because of the NDP Bill C-48 but nothing for the future. It clearly is a critical situation.

I have an e-mail from a woman in north Vancouver, Ann Roberts, who says that she needs affordable housing. The 1% reduction in the GST does nothing in terms of her purchasing power. She cannot afford to go to the dentist or buy some of the drugs she needs.

I was wondering if the member could address this problem in regard to budgeting and propose a solution in terms of affordable housing.

[Norman Doyle, Conservative, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, affordable housing is very important. I assure my colleague that Canada's new government is taking meaningful action to address the need for affordable housing, including affordable housing for low income seniors. Our government's plan includes funding in the amount of $1 billion. A note that I received today includes the amount of about $1 billion for an affordable housing initiative. In collaboration with provincial, territorial and local partners, we are in the process of delivering on that initiative. Affordable housing is important and it needs to be addressed.

The member talked about health care and health care for seniors. Governments over the years have failed seniors in many ways and we are all aware of this. It has not always been upfront or noticeable, but we have failed seniors in many different ways. When we look back over the years, the reduction in the transfers to the provinces has had a tremendous impact on provincial budgets. We can also look at the fact that $25 billion were cut from the health care budget over the years. I think it would be fair to say that seniors are the major recipients of health care and, therefore, when these programs are cut, it is bound to have a major impact upon seniors generally.

I could not agree more with the member. We do need to do more for seniors but we must be vigilant of health care transfers and so many different things.

[Blair Wilson, Liberal, West Vancouver—Sunshine Coast—Sea to Sky Country, BC]

Mr. Speaker, going through the budget and seeing how the Conservative government has dealt with seniors, the one thing that strikes me right away is the fact that the economic condition that Canada and the Government of Canada finds itself in is one of after 10 years of prosperity, the new government has incredible financial flexibility going forward. We have had record levels of debt being paid off, we have balanced budgets and we have surpluses.

What do we have with respect to seniors in this new budget? I do not think we have anything that is substantial. What we do have is an increase in the tax rate. For many low income Canadians, most of whom are low income seniors, the tax rate goes from 15% to 15.5%. Would the member not acknowledge that due to the increase in the lowest tax rate and a decrease in the personal exemption, we will have more and more Canadians on the tax rolls of this country, many of whom will be seniors? While the GST has been cut by 1%, the Conservatives are giving with pennies and taking away with dollars.

Will the hon. member tell the House exactly how many seniors will be put back on the tax rolls due to the Conservative government's increase in taxes?

[Norman Doyle, Conservative, St. John's East, NL]

Mr. Speaker, over the years the federal government's budgets have been balanced and, as a result of that, many good things have happened. It has not been all bad over the years. However, we must remember that the budget was often balanced on the backs of the provinces and on the backs of seniors.

When we look at the fact, as I mentioned a moment ago, that $25 billion were cut from the health care budget over the years, seniors suffered tremendously because of that.

We need a commitment from government that we will continue to look at our budgets in terms of health care and in terms of helping seniors and that should be a priority for any government.

[Raymond Chan, Liberal, Richmond, BC]

Mr. Speaker, the motion presented today by the member for Hamilton Mountain highlights the true spirit of Canada, a nation bound together by the philosophy of inclusion, of care and of community outreach.

As the opposition critic for seniors, I feel that it is incredibly important that the concerns of Canada's aging population be addressed in Parliament. The fact is that Canada's senior population is growing. By 2021, seniors will form 18% of our population, which is an increase from the 12.5% in 2000. As a result, the critical issues for seniors, like income security, affordable housing, long term care facilities, health care, home care, self-development and a representative voice in Parliament, need to be addressed by the House and, most important, by the Conservative government.

It is shameful that the current Conservative government pretends to have the best interests of seniors at heart and yet it has dismantled the secretary of state for seniors. It is shocking that within the throne speech the Prime Minister summed up the Conservative Party's commitment to seniors in nine words, “It, [being the government], will work to improve the security of seniors”.

The Conservative government's lack of commitment to Canada's seniors should not be a shock as budget 2006 contained only one measure directed specifically to seniors, surprise, surprise: a tax break, the Conservative solution to everything.

I am proud to be a part of a long Liberal tradition of ensuring that innovative and effective programs that address the real needs of Canadians are implemented. In the 2006 Liberal platform, we proposed constructive and practical measures to help better the lives of seniors. The Liberal Party committed to a $50 million investment to expand the new horizons program for seniors, a new mortgage equity access now for seniors program, an increase in the age limit for maturing registered pension plans and RRSP to 71 from 69, develop a pan-Canadian older workers strategy, and a $1 billion investment over five years to develop a national care giving strategy.

Those proposed measures were in addition to a solid Liberal track record on seniors' issues including: the creation of a minister of state to give seniors a voice at the cabinet table; the creation of a national seniors secretariat; the implementation of the largest increase in Canadian history to the guaranteed income supplement; a federally funded home adaptation for a seniors independent program; expansion of the residential rehabilitation assistance program to enable the creation of secondary rental and garden suites, an affordable rental housing option for low income seniors; a new tax credit in the 2004 budget allowing family caregivers to claim medical and disability related expenses; the creation of the new employment insurance compassionate care benefit to pay up to a maximum of six weeks to a person who has to be absent from work to provide care or support to a gravely ill family member at risk of dying; the launch of the new horizons for seniors program; the stabilization of the health care system by transferring $41.3 billion to the provinces to ensure Canadians, including seniors, have access to high quality health care regardless of their income; the creation of a new home care fund; and a commitment to develop a national pharmaceutical and catastrophic drug strategy.

The Liberal Party's approach to addressing seniors' evolving needs is broad-based and practical. This includes retirement income supports, with additional income support for low-income seniors, funding to support community-based projects that establish or strengthen networks and associations that keep seniors active in their communities, initiatives to help seniors stay longer in their homes, secure public health care and a new position of minister of state to ensure added attention to commitments made to seniors.

Because of 13 years of a Liberal government, fewer Canadian seniors now live in poverty. The fact is that the incidence of low income among Canadian seniors has dropped from a high of 11% in 1993 to an all-time low of 5.4% in 2004.

The Liberal government made a difference. For example, the Liberal government was the architect of one of Canada's greatest achievements, a deliverable, effective and sustainable retirement income system. It was also the Liberal government that implemented the old age security program, the Canada pension plan and the guaranteed income supplement.

I am particularly proud of the success of the new horizons for seniors program. Last year I had the honour to announce federal funding for the Chimo Crisis Services for its reaching out to isolated seniors project, in Richmond, B.C. It was a prime example of the federal Liberal government's commitment to strengthening and building inclusive communities that promoted the active living, empowerment and dignity of seniors.

New horizons for seniors has proven to an extremely valuable program that promotes community-based activities that help seniors pursue an active lifestyle and contribute to their communities. It is projects like this that support broad national objectives and regional priorities through the inspiration and leadership of seniors in our local communities.

The new horizons for seniors program recognizes the need for investing in Canadians and illustrates a successful nation-building initiative. In response to an overwhelming interest in the program, the former Liberal government announced an increase in funding to the program. The overall program budget was increased to $15 million in the 2005-06 budget and should reach $25 million by 2007-08.

This is another Liberal initiative of which Canadians can be proud.

The motion to create a seniors charter and seniors advocate opens up the opportunity to discuss the important issues that are affecting Canada's growing seniors population. As well, the motion creates the opportunity to question the motivation and logic behind the NDP's support of the Conservative government's attacks on the Liberal Party and questions the reasons why they helped bring down the former Liberal government.

For all intents and purposes, it appears that the NDP has simply forgotten or ignored the succession of Liberal initiatives, policies and legislation that were implemented to better the lives of Canada's seniors.

The Liberal Party supports the notion of the creation of a seniors charter and seniors advocate because it resonates with the spirit and thrust of so many of our actions. The simple fact is that the motion gives an encompassing name to a succession of Liberal policies and legislations, a seniors charter. Furthermore, it calls upon the government to reinstate and define the responsibilities of the minister of state for seniors and the national senior secretariat under the seniors advocate designation.

The motion illustrates the NDP's sheer hypocrisy to help bring down the former Liberal government, one that was committed to investing in the betterment of the lives of all Canadians, including seniors.

The motion also highlights the deficiency in the Conservative government's meagre strategy for senior citizen-related issues. By looking at each section contained in the motion, we can see exactly how the NDP is playing catch-up.

The motion calls for indexed income support for seniors, which it has been since 1973. In 2005-06, the Liberal government paid more than $28.5 billion a year in old age supplements and guaranteed income supplement benefits. Both of these payments were indexed to inflation. Further, over the next two years, the GIS, the guaranteed income supplement, will be increased by $2.7 billion, directly benefiting 1.6 million Canadian seniors.

The Liberal Party has responded to the evolving needs of seniors. On June 29, 2005, Bill C-43 was given royal assent and as a result, effective January 1, the GIS allowance and the allowance for the survivor increased by $18 per month in the case of a single recipient and $29 per month in the case of a couple.

Canada's seniors also receive more than $2 billion a year in direct tax credits such as the age credit and the pension income credit. Also, the proposed tax reductions in budget 2005 for individuals and adjustments to our tax system benefit seniors. Budget 2005 increased the amount of income that all Canadians could earn without paying federal income tax to $10,000. This will remove 240,000 seniors from the tax rolls.

Unfortunately, the Conservative government's rollback of the income tax reduction to offset the costs of the GST reduction has nullified most of these income tax gains. The Liberal Party has worked to address the changing financial needs of seniors and designed provisions to adjust the income support programs to reflect these needs.

The motion calls for affordable, secure and accessible housing. Again, the NDP is playing catch-up. The former Liberal government committed significant resources toward affordable housing. The previous Liberal government spent approximately $2 billion per year, through the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, in support of 636,000 affordable housing units. We also committed an additional $2 billion for homelessness and affordable housing in the 2006-07 budget. Under the affordable housing initiative, rent supplement programs were set up for those who were eligible for funding from the federal government. The home adaptations for seniors' independence program helped low income seniors stay longer in their homes.

Furthermore, a Liberal government was committed to investing an additional $1.5 billion over the next four years through the Canadian housing framework currently being developed. Unfortunately, many of the Liberal initiatives were cut short by the NDP and Conservative Party's political manoeuvring to the detriment of Canadians.

To address high energy prices, the Liberal government introduced the energy cost benefit to provide direct financial assistance to more than three million low income seniors and low income families with children. Senior couples, where both spouses were eligible for the GIS, would receive an extra $250, while single seniors were entitled to the GIS would receive $125. In addition to being available to low income individuals aged 65 and older, the energy cost benefit was also available to those aged 60 to 64 who were entitled to receive the allowance payment or allowance for survivor programs.

Again the Liberal Party has worked for Canadians to help bring more affordable and accessible housing to Canadians and Canada's seniors.

The motion calls for a secure public health care system. Once again, the NDP is playing catch-up. Health care is one of the top priorities, if the not the top priority, of the Liberal Party.

On September 16, 2004, the Government of Canada and first ministers signed an agreement on a 10 year plan to strengthen health care. The 10 year health care plan showed the Liberal government was committed to transferring $41.3 billion to the provinces to strengthen and support our universal health care system. The Liberal Party of Canada is committed to ensuring that all Canadians have access to quality, affordable health care regardless of income.

In addition, the Liberal government created a new employment insurance benefit. The compassionate care program allows family members to take time off work to provide care for seriously ill loved ones, without suffering sudden income or job loss. Again, the Liberal Party has worked for Canadian seniors and delivered a sustainable and secure investment to Canada's publicly funded care system.

The motion called for seniors' self-development. Again, the NDP is not calling for anything that the Liberal government has not already provided for seniors.

In October 2004 the Liberal government launched its promised new horizons for seniors program. Under the program, funding is provided for projects that establish strengthened networks and associations that keep seniors active in their communities and reach out to vulnerable seniors. Budget 2005 doubled annual funding for the new horizons for seniors program from $10 million to $25 million over the next two years.

Budget 2005 also provided $13 million over five years to establish a new national seniors secretariat that would serve as a focal point for our efforts to address the challenges facing seniors. Again, unfortunately, the Conservative government has cancelled this program and replaced it with nothing.

The Liberal Party has addressed all the elements of the NDP motion and the needs of Canada's seniors. At this point, this motion begins to beg the question. If the NDP is so committed to the needs of Canada's aging population, why did it help bring down a government that was actively involved in bettering the lives of seniors?

If we take a look at each of the elements of the NDP's motion, indexing GIS and OAS, affordable housing, health care, self-development and a representative voice in Parliament for seniors, they reflect a long-standing Liberal policy. The motion reflects the long-standing Liberal commitment to Canadians, to seniors and to innovative investments for the long term sustainability of Canada.

The NDP is playing catch-up to existing and, unfortunately, recently abolished Liberal policies with regard to Canadian seniors. Why is it proposing initiatives that the government has already developed? The charter appears to be an ill-conceived attempt to hide the simple fact that the party has no real policies to offer to Canadian seniors, just a renaming of Liberal policies.