Stella Ambler

[Business of Supply, May 16th, 2012]

Mr. Chair, I appreciate the opportunity to speak to this committee of the whole this evening.

Clean air is important to all Canadians. When our air is compromised by pollution, our health pays the price. When our government came into office in 2006, clean air was and remains a top priority. Air pollution is linked to a wide variety of health concerns, including asthma and cardiovascular disease. Air pollution can lead to premature death, increased hospital admissions, more emergency room visits and higher rates of worker absenteeism.

Budget 2011 alone provided almost $870 million in renewed funding for the clean air regulatory agenda to ensure that we can deliver on our commitments and priorities on air quality. Because of Canada's diverse geography and types of industrial development, pollution levels and the sources of air pollution vary across the country. Environment Canada is taking steps that will make an impact on air pollution across the country. These include regulations to reduce emissions from vehicles and engines, the gradual phase-out of coal-fired electricity generation and regulations to reduce emissions from certain consumer and commercial products that contain harmful elements in large quantities. The government is also working hard with the provinces and industrial stakeholders on a new, comprehensive, nationwide air quality management system to improve air quality across Canada.

The air quality management system has been developed over the past three years with the unprecedented collaboration of the federal, provincial and territorial governments; industry; and a broad range of other stakeholders. As part of the air quality management system, Canadian ambient air quality standards for particulate matter and ground-level ozone more stringent than the existing Canada-wide standards have been developed. The objective of these national standards is to achieve a level of air quality that provides a measurable improvement in the health of Canadians. These standards will also be used by provinces and territories to manage air quality at the regional and local levels.

In addition to national efforts to improve air quality within Canada, the Government of Canada is taking steps internationally to reduce the cross-border flow of air pollution and its impacts. Developing a clearer national framework on air pollution through the air quality management system will provide a strong basis for further engagement with the United States on transboundary airflow issues, including the Canada–U.S. air quality agreement. Cooperation between Canada and the United States on air quality is ongoing under the air quality agreement, and also under the mandate of the Canada-U.S. Regulatory Cooperation Council. Over 20 years ago, scientists concluded that transboundary movement of air pollution from industrial activities between Canada and the United States resulted in acid rain causing smog and serious damage to our environment. Action was taken to establish a joint agreement to address the issue. Following 20 years of cooperation between Canada and the U.S., emissions causing acid rain have been cut in half and emissions causing smog have been cut by one-third in the region covered under the agreement.

In Canada as a whole, emissions of the key pollutants that contribute to smog, acid rain and poor air quality have seen significant declines since 1990. For example, emissions of sulphur oxides declined by about 54%, mainly due to reductions from base-metal smelters which were down 72% and fossil-fuel fired electricity-generating utilities which decreased by 45%. Since the addition of the ozone annex to the Canada–U.S. air quality agreement in 2000, Canada has also reduced emissions to nitrogen oxide by one-third in southern and central Ontario and southern Quebec. Environment Canada's initiatives have also resulted in a 34% reduction in emissions of particulate matter which is linked to respiratory illness such as chronic bronchitis and asthma as well as cardiac illness and premature death.

However, more effort on particulate matter is required, and this government is acting. Environment Canada is working with the U.S. on the expansion of the Canada-U.S. air quality agreement to address transboundary particulate matter.

Environment Canada is also working with international partners under the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe to address transboundary air pollution.

In just the past few weeks, Canada played a constructive role in finalizing historic amendments to the 1999 Gothenburg protocol adopted in Geneva on May 4. This protocol will result in further global reductions of air pollution by 2020. The revised Gothenburg protocol is also noteworthy on air pollution policy because it is the first international treaty to include a short-lived climate pollutant, black carbon, as a component of particulate matter. Black carbon is both an air pollutant and a major contributor to global warming. By taking action to reduce black carbon emissions, we fight air pollution and climate change at the same time.

This government is proud of its achievements in reducing air pollution emissions. We are committing significant funding resources to continue the work. Again, progress has been achieved domestically, with close collaboration among this government and the provinces and territories and also bilaterally, by way of our ongoing work with the U.S. to reduce cross-border air pollution.

This government has also worked constructively with our partners in Europe and the U.S. to finalize and see adopted the revised Gothenburg protocol.

This issue is of the utmost importance to the people of Mississauga South, and to all Canadians. This government will continue to address Canada's air quality issues today and in the future, to ensure that future generations can breathe easier.

I do have a few questions for the minister. My first question, through you, Mr. Chair, for the Minister of the Environment is with regard to the current state of air quality compared with other countries.

What is the current state of our air quality in Canada?

[Nutrition Among Children, May 11th, 2012]

Madam Speaker, I listened with interest to my colleague's remarks. As the mother of a 17-year-old daughter myself, I realize the importance of activity and how important it is that the government has put forward initiatives to promote physical activity among young people.

What are my colleague's goals and what should be the goals of this kind of strategy? In other words, why is the member putting it forward?

[Human Trafficking in Peel Region, May 11th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise to call attention to a serious problem in the Peel region of the greater Toronto area. It is a cause for great sadness and concern among my constituents in Mississauga South, as well as other residents of Peel region, to know that human trafficking is being carried on there.

This government takes this problem very seriously. I am glad to know that in 2007 this Conservative government allocated funding to theMinister of Public Safety to combat child exploitation and trafficking. In 2009, the Minister of Public Safety established a program to increase awareness and to inform Canadians. The RCMP has a human trafficking national coordination centre to combat and disrupt human trafficking in Canada, but still it is my understanding that Canada is a primary destination for human trafficking from other parts of the world. There is still much to be done to eliminate this horrible crime.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-Term Prosperity Act, May 11th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, the hon. member for Mississauga—Streetsville does a fantastic job of representing his constituents in a neighbouring riding to mine. I would like to ask him about seniors who he is speaking to in his riding and what they are saying about OAS, particularly the sustainability of the program for future generations.

[Jobs, Growth and Long-term Prosperity Act, May 7th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the member opposite about jobs and, in particular, what he thinks about this government's jobs creation record and the fact that we have created 700,000 new jobs and, most importantly, that 90% of those jobs that were created since 2006 have been full-time jobs.

In my mind, it does not matter how old people are. These jobs are available to students who are graduating. They are available to middle-aged Canadians. They are available to older Canadians.

Does the member opposite believe that our strategy, which is to keep the economy strong and to look after the long-term prosperity of our country, is the right one to create jobs?

[New Democratic Party of Canada, May 3rd, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, virtually every day, the NDP makes an over-the-top characterization about government policy, unwarranted personal attacks and exaggerated claims. The NDP's willingness to accuse without proof and without hesitation reflects a deeper rot within that party.

Just this week, the NDP's new leader stood in his place and made a baseless smear about highly trained public servants. He claimed that these highly trained public servants were making immigration decisions based on race. I would ask for the proof behind this baseless allegation but we all know, as always, there is no proof.

The leader of the NDP will do absolutely anything to make the news, even if that means misleading Canadians. Canadians want to know when the NDP's baseless smear campaign will end.

While the NDP is playing its schoolyard games, we will continue to focus on what matters most to Canadians: jobs, economic growth and log-term prosperity.

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, that is a great question. This is a very serious issue, one which we are taking very seriously.

Today we spend 13¢ of every tax dollar on the OAS program. By 2030, this will grow to 21¢. If the changes are not made now, this program is not going to be sustainable for future generations.

The former governor of the Bank of Canada, David Dodge, said that we are up against a wall. That is exactly the truth. We have to do something now to protect those future generations. This is a vital program that is cherished by all Canadians. We must work to ensure it is sustainable for future generations.

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I would like to answer that question by referring to a comment made by our colleague across the way, the hon. member London—Fanshawe, who said, “Action now is critical. We need a plan in place. We need the structure in place to deal with this dramatic shift in our country's demographics”.

We agree with that comment. We agree because we know that we must work hard to ensure that OAS, Canada's largest single program, remains strong and is available to those future generations, not just for those who are approaching retirement but for those who will be retiring later. That applies to women and men. We are going to ensure that the program is available for future generations of seniors.

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, there is advance notice of 11 years and a 6-year phase-in period with respect to the changes. This would allow time for Canadians who would be affected to make the necessary changes to their retirement plans.

[Business of Supply, April 26th, 2012]

Mr. Speaker, I rise in the House today to promote the reasonable and necessary action our government is taking to ensure a sustainable old age security program. We are making these changes to give Canadians certainty in their retirement planning by ensuring this cherished social program will be there for future generations.

I will be sharing my time today with the hon. member for Calgary Northeast.

To begin, let me answer the question the opposition members still do not seem to understand: why are changes to the OAS program necessary? The answer is quite simple: these changes are being made to ensure the sustainability of the OAS program. If we do nothing, the costs of the OAS program are projected to rise dramatically, from approximately $38 billion now to $108 billion in 2030. How do we know this will happen? Canadians are living longer and healthier lives.

In 1970, life expectancy was 69 years for men and 76 years for women. Today, some 40 years later, it is 79 years for men and 83 years for women. What is more, the oldest members of the baby boomer generation, the largest in history, turned 65 last year. The impact of these boomers' retiring over the next two decades, combined with the increase in life expectancy of Canadians, will result in twice the number of seniors in Canada.

The OAS program is the Government of Canada's single largest program. Financed from general government revenues, OAS provides benefits to most Canadians 65 years of age and over.

The maximum annual OAS pension currently stands at $6,481, and it is adjusted on a quarterly basis, based on increases to the consumer price index. Additional support for low-income seniors is provided through the guaranteed income supplement, or GIS, which has a maximum annual benefit of $8,788 for single seniors and $11,654 for senior couples. Low-income spouses or common-law partners of GIS recipients and low-income survivors may also receive support through the allowance and the allowance for the survivor programs.

To provide some idea of the program's scope, 4.9 million individuals are currently receiving benefits. This will double to over nine million by 2030.

Let us look beyond the program's vital statistics to examine its past and where it is going.

The old age security program was established at a time when Canadians were not living the long, healthy lives they are now living. Projections show that the cost of the program will grow from $36 billion in 2010 to $108 billion in 2030. That same period will see the number of working-age Canadians per senior fall from 4:1 today to 2:1 in 2030. This compares to the 1990 ratio of five working-age Canadians per senior. That is quite a shift.

OAS is the largest single program of the Government of Canada, and it is funded 100% by annual tax revenues. Let me clear on this point. The benefits that were paid out this year to our deserving seniors came exclusively from the taxes that were collected this year. This is why the ratio of workers to retirees is critical to understanding why we must act now to ensure the sustainability of this program.

Today we spend 13¢ of every federal tax dollar on the old age security program. If we do not make changes now, in about 20 years that share will grow to 21¢ on every federal tax dollar spent. That is exactly why the changes announced in budget 2012 are necessary: to ensure that the OAS program remains on a sustainable path. These modifications will ensure that the OAS program remains strong and is there for future generations, as it is for seniors who currently receive these benefits.

What will this mean for Canadians? First and foremost there will be no reductions to seniors who are already collecting OAS benefits. These changes will not begin for another 11 years. Starting on April 1, 2023, the age of eligibility for OAS and GIS will gradually increase from 65 to 67, with full implementation by January 2029. Anyone who is 54 years of age or older as of March 31, 2012, will not be affected.

In line with the increase in age for OAS and GIS eligibility, the ages at which the allowance and allowance for survivors are provided will also gradually increase from 60 to 64 today, to 62 to 66 starting in April 2023. Regarding the allowance and the allowance for survivors, anyone who is 49 years of age or older as of March 31, 2012 will not be affected.

Let me stress again that this will occur in 2023, 11 years from now. The 11-year advance notification and the subsequent 6-year phase-in period will allow more than ample time for those affected by these changes to make the necessary adjustments to their retirement plans.

The government will ensure that certain federal programs which are currently providing income support benefits until 65 are aligned with the changes to the OAS program. We are taking this step to make sure that individuals receiving benefits from these programs do not face a gap in income at the ages of 65 and 66.

We are also examining the impact of the OAS program changes on CPP disability and survivor benefits.

We have also committed to reimbursing the provinces for the net cost of raising the OAS eligibility so that there will be no additional cost borne by the provinces. This is in stark contrast to the previous Liberal government, which changed many programs and left the provinces to pick up the tab.

I would like to take a moment to focus on some of the great OAS program modifications announced in budget 2012 which have received far less attention so far.

To improve flexibility and choice in the OAS program for those wishing to work until later in life, the government will allow for the voluntary deferral of the OAS pension for up to five years starting on July 1, 2013.

We should think about the people I spoke of earlier, those who are enjoying longer, healthier lives and who may be considering extending their careers. This is a trend we are already seeing when it comes to the average age of retirement. This measure will give these individuals the option of deferring their OAS pension to a later time, and as a result, they will receive a higher monthly amount. However, I should add that GIS benefits which provide additional support to the lowest income seniors will not be adjusted.

The details of these actions are spelled out in the jobs, growth and long-term prosperity bill which was introduced this morning and will implement various provisions of the budget.

Our government will also be improving services for seniors by putting in place a proactive enrolment effort that will eliminate the need for many seniors to apply for their OAS benefits. This measure will reduce the burden on many seniors of completing applications for benefits for which the government knows they have qualified.

As an added bonus, this automatic process will reduce the government's administrative costs, which I would observe is what sets our deficit reduction strategy apart from our predecessor's in that we are improving services to Canadians while reducing the cost of administration. Proactive enrolment will begin next year and will be fully implemented by 2016.

In summary, it is the responsibility of the federal government to think of the future and to act in the long-term interests of all Canadians. Sadly, the opposition has refused to acknowledge the realities of our aging population in order to play political games.

Private sector economists, financial institutions and former Bank of Canada governors have confirmed that we must act now to make the OAS program sustainable. That is exactly why I cannot support the opposition's motion.