Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the hon. member for Edmonton—Leduc, who is a highly respected member of the Standing Committee on Finance. His work is greatly appreciated by members of all the parties.
His question is relevant, but this is not necessarily about whether we would support it or not. My argument about pension income splitting focused on program logistics. Generally speaking, pensioners do not have as much income. Therefore, this will impact their income differently than it will the income of the general population.
If we look at the results, this program requires far more tax expenditures than initially forecast. There was no calibration at all.
Then, if you take everyone who is retired and divide them into two groups—one group for those with a higher income and the other with a lower income compared to the median—it becomes clear that 98% of the tax breaks will go to the 50% of pensioners who have a higher income.
Those who really need it, the people in the 50% with the lower income, will not benefit very much. It might lower their taxes by less than $20. Those who benefit are the retirees with a higher income.
It seems that calibration was not necessarily a consideration, and that is a very serious wake-up call for a much larger measure that would affect families with children.