Candice Bergen

[Pensions, April 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that was a little extreme but thankfully Canadians have elected a strong, stable Conservative majority government because of our economic track record and because they trust us to take care of the economy of the country. After hearing that tirade, I think it is very obvious why.

The numbers speak for themselves. According to the Chief Actuary, the number of basic OAS recipients is expected to almost double over the next 20 years. According to the opposition, who will pay for that? I guess the opposition members think that money will appear out of thin air. This will change and this change will affect the ratio of workers to retirees increasing the burden on working Canadians to an unsustainable level.

Again, sticking one's head in the sand and denying the facts will not make them go away. Sadly, the opposition refuses to acknowledge the realities of our aging population and instead is playing political games.

In 2023, which is 11 years from now, we will gradually raise the age of OAS eligibility from 65 years of age to 67 years of age. We are making these changes to ensure the sustainability of the program for future generations of Canadians.

[Pensions, April 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased that the member opposite, even in her own words, understands that the government needs to act in a responsible and forward way to secure the financial future of seniors. It is disappointing that the NDP appeared to either not understand the situation with OAS or refused to acknowledge it.

The fact is that Canadians are living longer, healthier lives than past generations and we will be relying on retirement income for longer periods of time. As David Dodge, who is the former governor of the Bank of Canada and deputy minister of finance said, we need to address the fiscal problem of old age security. He also said that denying it would not make the problem go away. He said that we are “15 years late in getting started...and, because labour participation rates will start to fall later this decade, we're up against the wall”. We need to ensure that our retirement income system can adjust to this trend and stay strong and sustainable for generations to come, and that changing demographics do not affect the affordability of the OAS program.

As I said earlier, the number of Canadians over the age of 65 will increase from 4.7 million to 9.3 million over the next 20 years. Consequently, the cost of the OAS program will increase from $36 billion per year in 2010 to $108 billion per year in 2030. OAS is the largest single program of the Government of Canada and it is funded 100% by annual tax revenues. This is a situation that must be addressed and it takes government leadership to do that. Again, it is disappointing that the NDP members do not acknowledge this.

Right now there are four working-age Canadians to every senior and by 2030 this will shrink to two. This is the issue. If we were going to ignore the coming demographic changes, we would simply be passing the buck to a future Parliament and to future generations, including our children. The choice would be to raise taxes to such an extent that they would cripple our economy or parliamentarians would be forced to do the unthinkable and examine the very sustainability of this program. We refuse to allow this to happen. We will make the common sense changes now, with a lengthy notice period, to ensure the sustainability of this program.

I will clarify once again that no current seniors will lose a penny because of these changes. The gradual increase to qualify for OAS from 65 years of age to 67 will begin in 2023 and finish by 2029. This is over 11 years away. The opposition should stop playing politics, stop fear-mongering and support our common sense changes to ensure the very sustainability of this very cherished social benefit.

[Housing, April 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, we have invested more than $2 billion under Canada's economic action plan to renovate existing, and build new, social housing across the country.

We continue to provide $1.7 billion a year in support of almost 615,000 households living in existing social housing. We are also delivering on our 2008 commitment to invest $1.9 billion over five years in housing and homelessness programs. We are spending about $407 million annually to address housing needs on reserve.

We will continue to work with provinces, territories and other stakeholders to deliver made-in-Canada affordable housing solutions. We have specific funding for affordable housing for seniors, the disabled and for those off-reserve and on reserve. We did all of this in spite of the opposition parties that voted against us every single time we tried to help people. Unfortunately, the NDP does not have a lot of credibility on this issue because of its voting record.

[Housing, April 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Davenport frequently does ask questions of our government in regard to housing.

In fact on February 6, he suggested that the Minister of Finance's concern with household debt levels was inconsistent with statements by the Minister of Human Resources and Skills Development in support of home ownership.

I want to assure the House that no such inconsistency exists. Our approach is balanced and sound with the goal of ensuring that Canadians from all walks of life and all parts of the country have access to housing that meets their needs. Whether through rental housing or home ownership, the vast majority of Canadians are able to meet their housing needs in the marketplace. We recognize that this is not possible for all Canadians.

That is why we have policies in place to support the full range of housing options: home ownership for those who can afford it, rental housing for those who need or prefer this option, and housing assistance for those whose needs cannot be met in the marketplace, including low-income families, seniors, people with disabilities and first nations people on reserve.

In addition, our government, through CMHC, has invested an estimated $12.5 billion in federal housing assistance since 2006, investments that have improved living conditions for thousands of low-income Canadians and helped to build stronger communities from coast to coast to coast.

We continue to invest heavily in housing. This year, through CMHC, the Government of Canada will invest approximately $2 billion in housing. Of this amount, $1.7 billion will be spent in support of almost 615,000 households living in existing social housing. Because the hon. member asked specifically about Toronto, I would like to point out that an estimated 267,200 households in Ontario, living in existing social housing, receive this support.

In addition, communities across Ontario are also benefiting from the three year federal investment of more than $240 million provided under the investment in affordable housing funding that is aimed at reducing the number of Ontarians in housing need.

Our government is working hard to ensure that people in Toronto, in Ontario and in communities across the country have access to safe, suitable and affordable housing.

[Pensions, April 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is ducking the issue. If we are interested in job creation, economic growth and the financial well-being of Canadians, we have to address the future affordability of OAS.

It is the responsibility of the federal government to think of the future and to act in the long-term interests of all Canadians. Private sector economists, financial institutions and former Bank of Canada governors have confirmed that we must act now to make the OAS program sustainable.

Unfortunately, the opposition parties have chosen the low road. Baseless fearmongering and wilful ignorance of the need for change does not serve the interests of Canadians. We will not follow the opposition approach of sticking our heads in the sand and pretending we are oblivious to the upcoming changes. We have to face up to the reality that there will be fewer workers for the number of retirees.

[Pensions, April 30th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, sadly, the opposition continues to mischaracterize the necessary changes we need to ensure the sustainability of the old age security program.

Let me be very clear. No seniors currently receiving benefits would see any reduction to their benefits. The changes we are making would be begin in 2023 and would gradually, over a period of six years, raise the age of OAS eligibility from 65 to 67 years. This would give Canadians a chance to prepare, which the opposition seems to ignore.

The opposition also refuses to acknowledge the facts in this debate. While people are living longer, our birth rate has been falling. By 2030, for the first time ever, we will have more people over the age of 65 than under the age of 20. The number of seniors will double over the next two decades. This is not unique in the world. The United Nations reports that, in 2005, 10% of the world's population was 60 years or older. By 2050, that proportion will more than double, to reach 22%.

Today, we rank 27th in the list of countries, in terms of average age. These are facts that the opposition cannot ignore. By 2030, Canada is projected to be the eleventh oldest country in the world and the eighth oldest of the 34 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, OECD, countries.

This is a staggering increase in a relatively short period of time, and it comes with a high price tag. Again, it is something the opposition obviously does not understand.

The annual cost of the OAS program is expected to triple between 2010 and 2030, from $36 billion to $108 billion. At the same time, our seniors population is rising. The ratio of working-age Canadians to seniors is expected to fall from 4:1 in 2011 to 2:1 in 2030.

Our government is making responsible decisions so that OAS will be sustainable for generations to come. We are also giving Canadians a very good chance and a long period to prepare for this change.

When the opposition has a chance to support seniors, it votes against our measures every time. This is responsible government making responsible decisions, and we ask the opposition to support it.

[Office of the Inspector General, April 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the member opposite is incorrect. In fact, the services that are provided are duplicate in their oversight over CSIS, Again, this will save the taxpayers dollars, and it will not affect the oversight that is provided over CSIS.

[Office of the Inspector General, April 27th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, currently there is duplicate oversight over CSIS. The responsibilities of the Office of the Inspector General will be merged into the Security Intelligence Review Committee. This decision will preserve all of the oversight and accountability over CSIS while reducing administrative costs, saving taxpayers $1 million a year. I know the NDP do not really like saving taxpayer dollars, but we do.

[Flooding in Montérégie, April 25th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, we will continue to be committed to the safety, security and resilience of Canadians. Working with our federal, provincial and territorial partners, we will continue to make our communities more resilient to all types of natural disasters. The Government of Canada supports victims of natural disasters in the provinces and territories through the disaster financial assistance arrangements, which is administered by the provinces.

Public Safety Canada has received a request for assistance under the DFAA from the Province of Quebec and officials from both governments are working together in moving this request forward.

I again would remind the member opposite that budget 2012 provided up to $99.2 million over three years to assist the provinces and territories, like Quebec, with the cost of permanent flood mitigation measures undertaken in advance of the 2011 floods. I also remind the member that he did not support the budget. He should have stood up for his constituents and supported budget 2012.

The government remains committed to closely working with the provinces and territories and affected communities to increase resilience and help return them to normal life as quickly as possible.

[Flooding in Montérégie, April 25th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I appreciate the opportunity to address the hon. member's question regarding disaster assistance for provinces and territories for flooding in 2011, including those in the flood-affected Richelieu valley in Quebec. I am very pleased to clarify for the member the federal responsibilities and the federal commitment that our government has made and continues to follow through on.

The 2011 flood season highlighted the importance of this government's continued commitment to strengthen the safety, security and resilience of communities across Canada. In the case of flooding, as with all emergencies, the provinces and territories are primarily responsible for the design and delivery of financial assistance to those directly affected by a given disaster. The primary mechanism that the government uses to support the provinces and territories in post-disaster recovery is the disaster financial assistance arrangements. Since its inception in 1970, the Government of Canada has provided over $2.1 billion in federal financial assistance under the disaster financial assistance arrangements, or DFAA, across the country, of which over $970 million have been provided to the Government of Quebec to administer.

In respect of provincial and territorial jurisdiction, individuals who have not yet received assistance should contact their provincial or territorial emergency measures organization. This will allow our officials to process provincial requests for assistance in the most efficient and expedient manner. The Province of Quebec has submitted its request for assistance under the disaster financial assistance arrangements. Public Safety Canada officials are working with provincial officials to move forward with the request as quickly as possible, as is the process. Should the application for DFAA be approved, Public Safety Canada will then work to review provincial expenditures in support of an advanced payment in accordance with existing guidelines.

In order to eliminate or reduce the impact and risks of hazards, some provinces made proactive permanent mitigation investments in advance of the 2011 flood season. The Government of Canada is committed to sustainable investments in disaster mitigation. For mitigative measures taken in advance of the 2011 flood season, the Government of Canada has agreed to cost share these investments with the provinces on a fifty-fifty basis.

The Prime Minister also stated that the Government of Canada was committed to discussing a long-term national mitigation strategy. The member opposite will also know that budget 2012 provided up to $99.2 million over three years to assist the provinces and territories with the cost of permanent flood mitigation measures undertaken in advance of the 2011 floods. That is the budget he did not support. He should have stood up for his constituents in Quebec and supported budget 2012 to help with mitigation costs.

Disaster mitigation is recognized as one of the most effective means to address and/or eliminate disaster risks. Investment in mitigation reduces the impact of disasters on the lives of Canadians. Additionally, it is an effective approach in reducing the financial burden on governments, businesses, communities and individuals who are affected economically by disasters.

The government is committed to the safety and security of our citizens. Through our collaborative approach to working with our federal, provincial and territorial partners, we will continue to make our communities more resilient to all types of natural disasters.