House of Commons Hansard #117 of the 42nd Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament's site.) The word of the day was retirement.

Topics

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:20 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I believe that a number of points in that comment should be addressed.

First of all, we have done research on Canadians' actual situation and where they will find themselves in their future retirement. We know that by increasing the Canada pension plan through savings, we will be able to move from 25% to 33% of their earnings being covered by those savings, making an important difference to them in the future. We also know that over the long term, what this will do is actually enhance our economic outcome. Importantly, we know that 75% of Canadians are in support of this measure, because they recognize the challenge they have saving enough for retirement.

Finally and importantly, this is one measure among many that we are moving forward with for seniors. We have improved the guaranteed income supplement, which is helping single seniors who are in the most vulnerable positions. We have also improved the situation for Canadians in the middle class by ensuring that they are able to get old age security at age 65. These measures together are making a real and important difference today for seniors and they will make an important difference tomorrow as well.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

Alistair MacGregor NDP Cowichan—Malahat—Langford, BC

Madam Speaker, I want to start off by acknowledging the incredible work of my colleague from Hamilton Mountain in bringing forward the flaws in the bill.

My question for the Minister of Finance centres on the drop-out provisions that are missing from the bill. For several weeks now, my colleagues have raised this issue. They were met with non-answers from the government. We finally had the President of the Treasury Board acknowledge that the problem exists.

Why is the government waiting until the next meeting of provincial finance ministers to fix this? Why are we cutting off debate now? Why is the government not fixing these provisions right here and now? Could he not phone his colleagues in the provincial governments to fix those provisions now?

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, we believe that it is very important that we move forward on improving retirement outcomes for Canadians. We negotiated with the provinces to come to an agreement that would help all Canadians find a better outcome in retirement. We will see that they will find themselves in a much better position with this agreement on the Canada pension plan, especially people who are not in pension programs. We have an agreement with the provinces that we are looking forward to moving forward with in December.

We recognize that the pension outcomes for Canadians, in particular for women and others, can always be improved. That is why we will continue to advocate, together with the provinces, on how we can do that in the future. We recognize that this is a continuing file, one that we have taken on in an important way, as the generations before us took it on to make a difference for Canadians today. It is one that we know will continue to be focused on in the years to come.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Conservative

Jim Eglinski Conservative Yellowhead, AB

Madam Speaker, the finance committee has analyzed the bill, and it tells us that it is going to reduce private savings, disposable income, business investments, the GDP, and employment by over 100,000 people over a 10-year period. Why is the government doing the exact opposite of what it should be doing: increasing all those areas instead of decreasing them?

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I am very happy to address this question. There were a number of points made. Let me start by saying that we did research to determine how we should best move forward on enhancing the Canada pension plan. We first and foremost did research about Canadians' actual situation today and what they are likely to see in the future. We understand that many, many Canadians are finding themselves in a situation where they will not have the ability to retire with adequate savings, adequate income, in the future. That is why we moved forward.

What we also saw was that, in fact, over the long term, this will help our economy. First, it will increase savings. That is clear. Second, over the long term, it will actually improve our economic outcome as Canadians see themselves in a more secure situation, as businesses are able to retain their employees for a longer period of time, and as we are able to have a functioning economy that makes good use of employees who are able to stay in the workforce so that they can be successful not only there but in retirement.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Madam Speaker, for the life of me, I still cannot figure out, on this important legislation, why a feminist government would actually penalize women in the way it is doing. What is happening is that the government is actively taking out a provision that has been in existence since 1977 in support of women with respect to the drop-out provision. Why would the government do this? Is it the case that the minister went to the table with the provincial and territorial leaders and said that we will trade this provision for these other provisions? Is that what happened? How did it come to this, where you would actively take out a provision that mattered to women and to people with disabilities?

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

I just want to remind the member that she is to address questions through the Chair, so I would suggest that members do not use the word “you”.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

NDP

Jenny Kwan NDP Vancouver East, BC

Madam Chair, through you to the Minister of Finance.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:25 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, let me start by correcting a factual inaccuracy. We did not take out any drop-out provisions in the CPP. Under the core CPP, the drop-out provisions that have been in place remain in place. There has been no provision that changes in any way that core CPP.

What we have done with the enhanced CPP is recognize that those Canadians who are not on pension plans are in a situation where they need an enhanced Canada pension plan that will actually improve their outcomes over time. We have come to a negotiation with the provinces that provides for the largest possible increase, consistent with the amount we are willing to encourage people to save. That is what we have done. We have come to an agreement with the provinces on that approach. We believe it will make a very important difference for all Canadians, including women and including those who are now in a situation where they are challenged in retirement.

What we also recognize is that there will always be opportunities for continued improvement. Our job, in working together with the provinces, is to move forward on this agreement and then to consider other ways we can improve the Canada pension plan in the future to ensure that the retirement health of Canadians is always provisioned for.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Conservative

Tom Kmiec Conservative Calgary Shepard, AB

Madam Speaker, a few times now the Minister of Finance has said that the debate is at a stalemate. I do not know how it has been stalemated in any way. We have had eight days of debate. This is the ninth time the government has moved time allocation on a bill. The minister said that 70 members of Parliament have risen and spoken, among them about 40 Conservatives. However, I was looking forward to speaking on this bill and sharing my thoughts. I do not believe that debate equals a stalemate. That is a comment I want to make so the minister can take that back and think about it.

We have 337 members of Parliament who can rise and speak in this House. You, Madam Speaker, cannot do so while in the Chair seat.

I simply do not see what the government's rush is. This bill will have an impact over 40 years, and the government is trying to rush it through Parliament with only eight days of debate so far. What is the rush?

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, let me first say that I am happy that the member opposite has had the opportunity to speak about this measure. While he is not asking anything directly about the actual bill we are trying to move forward, he is talking about how we are doing it, and I think it is worth responding.

First, as the member knows, we have looked toward making a real and important difference in retirement outcomes for Canadians. It is part of the platform we ran on and something we did a significant amount of work on with Canadians. It is also something we worked on with the provinces to get to an agreement with the nine provinces that are signatories to the Canada pension plan. That agreement came about in collaboration.

In the case of this House, we believe that with eight days of debate, and with 70 MPs having been able to speak on this, including almost 40 MPs from the Conservative caucus, representing almost half of its MPs, we have moved forward in a way that shows that we are listening and that we want to make sure we do the right thing and have the appropriate amount of debate in this House, consistent with this bill and the other important measures we need to move forward on behalf of Canadians.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

NDP

Scott Duvall NDP Hamilton Mountain, ON

Madam Speaker, I am very surprised that we want to cancel the debate on a flawed bill. The Liberals know that it is flawed.

I find it difficult to understand when the minister is saying that the Liberals did not take out any drop-out provisions. He is correct in saying that about the basic CPP, but I find it odd that the general drop-out provision was included in the enhancement, yet child-rearing and people with disabilities were omitted from the enhancement. Why is that?

Why do we want to rush a bill that we know is flawed? Why do we not get it fixed first? If he has to go back to the provincial ministers, then he should do so and bring it back so we can have a bill that is correct and fair for all Canadians.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:30 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, I know the member opposite has worked hard on the bill, and I appreciate his work. I know this is something he cares enormously about, as do we.

What we are trying to do with the enhanced CPP is to ensure that we have the biggest possible impact on Canadians. We are ensuring that Canadians who are not in pension plans, those Canadians in particular who are under-represented in defined benefit and defined contribution pension plans, have the appropriate opportunity to save through the Canada pension plan. That's a critically important part of this bill.

In negotiating with the provinces, we were looking at how we could have a positive impact on the broadest number of people, especially those not represented in pension plans, as is disproportionately the case for women. We have made improvements that will make a significant difference over time. These have been done in collaboration with the provinces.

We know as well that it is important to continue discussions on how we can further help those who are under-saving and who are finding themselves in a situation where they need more money for retirement. We have committed to doing that. We will do that in collaboration with the provinces in the years to come.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Conservative

Peter Kent Conservative Thornhill, ON

Madam Speaker, we in the official opposition are still waiting for the finance minister to explain his conversion on the road to higher taxes.

I think it is worthwhile as we face this closure vote to remember the words of his coauthor of The Real Retirement, Mr. Vettese, who said in the Financial Post, “Canadians are not facing retirement crisis, nor is such a crisis likely to arise”.

In a different piece, it has been said:

Instead of expending political energy on debating CPP expansion in the misguided belief that many middle- and upper-income Canadians are not saving enough for retirement, the focus of public debate should be on how best to help financially vulnerable seniors.

I wonder if the minister could explain to us how he is squaring the circle here.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, in our efforts to make a long-term difference for Canadians, we need to think about the short term, the medium term, and the long term. That is exactly what we are doing with retirement issues.

The member opposite has pointed out that there are Canadian seniors who are now facing a difficult challenge. What we did in budget 2016 is recognize that. By increasing the guaranteed income supplement for single seniors by 10% and giving almost $1,000 a year more to those single seniors, we are significantly reducing the number of vulnerable seniors right now.

By looking at the old age security system and recognizing that this security system helps Canadians who are really in the middle income area, and moving forward on the agreement to ensure they are able to get old age security at age 65, we are helping middle-class Canadians in the medium term.

Over the long term, we know that Canadians are not saving enough for retirement. We know that's particularly the case for Canadians who are not in pension plans.

What we are doing with the enhancement to the Canada pension plan is ensuring that through the savings they put in today, together with savings their employers put in today, workers will be in a better situation in the years to come and there will be better retirement income for Canadians today, tomorrow, and in the future.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

NDP

Anne Minh-Thu Quach NDP Salaberry—Suroît, QC

Madam Speaker, I would like to recognize the outstanding work of my colleague from Hamilton Mountain on the pension issue.

Let me say how disappointed I am that the Liberals are using time allocation once again, for the ninth time, and on an issue as important as improving our pension plan.

It is a little ironic that the Minister of Finance is saying that he wants to improve the system and increase the number of recipients. The bill has so many flaws that now the Liberals are backpedalling. In 1977, women acquired the right to obtain an exclusion for the years they contribute to their families, for up to eight years. Now that right is being taken away. According to a formula on the Service Canada website, women who stay home to raise their children would get between $800 and $1,200 less per year with the system the Liberals want to bring in.

Is that what the Liberals call supporting women and working to improve the lives of women and the middle class? They are robbing Peter to pay Paul. It makes no sense.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:35 a.m.

Liberal

Bill Morneau Liberal Toronto Centre, ON

Madam Speaker, we know that in future years, many Canadians will face uncertainty in retirement. We know that we need to take measures now to improve the outcomes later. We also know that the situation is especially difficult for those people who do not have access to a workplace pension plan. They are the ones who need these improvements most. We helped them by enhancing the Canada pension plan. Thanks to this significant enhancement, we will end up with a system that helps people in the most difficult situations.

We know that it will be important to sit down with the provinces in the future to find a way to achieve our goal of providing a better outcome for all Canadians, especially women. That is what we want for the future.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

It is my duty to interrupt the proceedings and put forthwith the question necessary to dispose of the motion now before the House.

The vote is on the motion. Is it the pleasure of the House to adopt the motion?

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Some hon. members

Agreed.

No.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

All those in favour of the motion will please say yea.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Some hon. members

Yea.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

All those opposed will please say nay.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

Some hon. members

Nay.

Bill C-26--Time Allocation MotionCanada Pension PlanGovernment Orders

10:40 a.m.

NDP

The Assistant Deputy Speaker NDP Carol Hughes

In my opinion the yeas have it.

And five or more members having risen:

Call in the members.

(The House divided on the motion, which was agreed to on the following division:)

Vote #156