44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 11, 2022 10:00AM
Madam Speaker, let us not be mistaken. We are all delighted that the government is finally moving on this, and we want to work together collaboratively to make this happen. With regard to listening to real Canadian stories of hardship and loss, Canadian seniors have been struggling. Low-income seniors are worthy of some healthy debate by the people they elected to be here. There is a tremendous amount of study, but this is not something that we would belabour. We need to act on it quickly. It does not need to be long and drawn-out.
97 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I listened with intent during the member's speech and there are a couple of things I would like to comment on before I get to my question.
The government has been there for seniors since it was elected in 2015, whether it was increases in the guaranteed income supplement or the emergency payments during the pandemic. We have brought 250,000 seniors out of poverty and we are also proposing to increase the guaranteed income supplement by $500 above and beyond what this legislative measure represents.
Constituents in my riding remember that when the Harper Conservatives were in government, they increased the OAS eligibility up to 67. I know the member opposite was not part of that government at the time.
I am proud of the government's record. I am concerned that the member, in one breath, says that we have to get support out to seniors, but yet procedurally is saying it is absolutely important, notwithstanding the fact that we could have agreement in the House to move forward with this measure, and she does not want to move in that fashion.
My question to the member is on solutions. The Conservative Party is often calling for pulling back on finances. I am fine with that if that is its principle, but at the same time, she is saying we need to do more for seniors. What would her solutions be? Is it to put more money back into seniors' pockets by government spending more? Is it spending less, and if so, what impact would that have on seniors? Can she speak to that?
269 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, with all due respect, six years ago I still had a BlackBerry. I was not part of the Harper government and I will not speak to that today. The focus of the debate is seniors. The official opposition, the Conservative Party of Canada, is suggesting constructive, thorough and timely action. We are not disagreeing with the government. This should have been acknowledged months ago and I am happy to be part of the solution.
76 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to speak about a subject that is very dear to my heart, namely, the living conditions of our seniors. I would also like to say that I will be sharing my time with the hon. member for Mirabel.
Bill C-12, which is currently before us, seeks to amend the Old Age Security Act to exclude any pandemic relief benefits from the calculation of the guaranteed income supplement.
It is important to note that, as it now stands, the bill would exclude those benefits only as of July 2022. It will come as no surprise when I say that my Bloc Québécois colleagues and I will support the bill introduced by the Minister of Seniors because it is a first step, however timid, toward correcting the tragic injustice that has befallen thousands of seniors, who are being penalized for taking advantage of measures that were supposed to help them.
It is appalling that, after working their entire lives, our seniors are experiencing a lower quality of life, a loss of purchasing power and a loss of dignity because of an uncaring government's administrative incompetence.
The Bloc Québécois has a deep and unwavering conviction that we must either acknowledge or at least have the decency to make it possible for each of our seniors to live with dignity, sheltered from financial insecurity.
As a Quebecker from the Lower St. Lawrence, I know that the progressive, prosperous and proud society that I had the good fortune to grow up in, and now devote my work to, was built by those who came before me. Architects and labourers of the Quiet Revolution, our grandparents and parents dedicated their lives to building today's modern and innovative Quebec.
On a more personal level, I would like to acknowledge that I am lucky and privileged to represent the people of Rimouski‑Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques. In my region, the Lower St. Lawrence, 26.8% of the people are 65 or older, while the Quebec average is around 19.7%. By 2040, it is estimated that more than one-third of my constituents will be 65 or older.
It goes without saying that measures that have an impact on the living conditions of seniors are acutely felt in my neck of the woods, and the current problem is no exception. In fact, at my offices in Rimouski and in Témiscouata‑sur‑le‑Lac, I have gotten many calls and messages from seniors distressed by cuts to their GIS since July 2021.
These benefits help them meet their basic needs, and the hardship they are experiencing cannot be overstated. They do not understand why the government is failing to show any leadership to correct the situation.
Take for example Ms. Gagnon from Trois‑Pistoles. She was receiving a combined pension of $1,409 a month, and she received the CERB in 2020 after abruptly losing her job. In October 2021, her monthly income went from $1,409 to $719 when her GIS was completely cut off.
Imagine having $690 clawed back from one day to the next. Ms. Gagnon could not maintain her standard of living when her benefit barely covered her rent. To put food on the table, she had to resort to a food bank. To fill the tank, she had to max out her credit card. That is because Ms. Gagnon is now being taxed at an effective federal rate of 50%, which is almost twice the marginal rate that Canada's wealthiest taxpayers pay.
My hon. colleague from Mirabel is an economist by trade. Given that we are talking about marginal rates, of course it made sense to share my time with him.
Even though it was decided at the beginning that the CERB would be taxable, nobody in the federal government notified GIS recipients that collecting the CERB would cut into their benefits quite this much.
It makes absolutely no sense that the most vulnerable seniors in our society should have to face such an injustice. Furthermore, the corrective measure proposed in Bill C-12 does not take effect until July 2022. This means that GIS recipients will have had to cope with a drastically reduced monthly payment for 12 long and difficult months. Why did the government not act sooner?
The Bloc Québécois wrote to the Minister of Seniors and the Minister of Finance before the last election was even called this past August to bring this matter to their attention before it was too late, but to no avail. This government decided to call an election in the midst of a pandemic, and meanwhile, it is taking more than a year to correct a situation that is having a devastating impact.
The Bloc Québécois has also called for the measures in the bill to take effect as of March 2022 rather than July. We were told that this was impossible for IT-related reasons, which is both absurd and appalling. How can an IT system be so rigid that the government would rather force seniors into financial insecurity than change the parameters of the system?
In closing, not only is Bill C‑12 arriving far too late, it is missing a core element for it to really address the problems that the pandemic relief measures created for GIS recipients. What is strikingly missing from this bill is the $742 million in retroactive one-time payments promised in December's economic and fiscal update. This one-time payment was supposed to compensate GIS recipients who had received the CERB or the CRB in 2020, by alleviating the financial difficulties they are facing.
This government promised $742 million to vulnerable seniors who desperately need it. Today, it has chosen to take a pass on keeping its promise. How long will seniors have to wait before receiving the amounts they were promised and are owed?
Need I remind my colleagues that Quebec and Canada are facing the highest rate of inflation in 35 years and that the poorest are bearing the brunt once again?
Instead of debating a bill that focuses solely on stopping the undue slashing of seniors' benefits, we should stand together to increase their pensions. The Bloc Québécois has been proposing a $110-a-month increase in old age security for seniors 65 years of age and over for a long time. As I stated earlier, I will support Bill C‑12, but, when I see all these blind spots and missed opportunities, all I can say is that the Liberals squandered an opportunity to do much better.
1139 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I think we can all agree in the House that supporting seniors is an important initiative, and that is why this government has been working on a lot of different elements.
I do not know what the member opposite's profession might have been before he came to the House, but the problem I have is that it is easy to get up and say he wants to increase old age security by $110. In fact, the Bloc Québécois brought a motion in the 43rd Parliament to do just that. Unfortunately, what he does not explain is the actual cost of delivering that program, which would have been approximately $8 billion a year, year over year. This is the same member who also talks about increasing health transfers by $28 billion.
How does the member square how, within the fiscal framework, this is possible? Could he perhaps bring forward some ideas about how we are going to raise funds for 35 billion dollars' worth of initiatives added to the fiscal framework of the Government of Canada?
182 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Kings—Hants for his question.
What is surprising is how the government was digging in its heels during the previous Parliament. It did not want to increase seniors' income. However, during the election campaign, the government saw the light and decided that it could use this opportunity to show some goodwill and increase the guaranteed income supplement for seniors starting at age 65.
What I can tell my colleague is that some of the money from the increase to the old age security pension will go back into the economy. These seniors will have more purchasing power and will be able to spend more, thus enabling the government to recover some of that money through taxes.
124 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the member mentioned several times that this legislative measure will finally correct a mistake made on something that the government should have known from the start. I agree with him on that. Many Conservative and Bloc members mentioned it, and the government changed its mind on the subject during the election campaign.
Does my colleague think it is a good idea to try to rush the bill through the House, as the government House leader has decided to do, rather than taking a little more time in committee to debate and to hear from witnesses who might be able to share some other ideas on how to fix this law so we can ensure that seniors get the benefits they deserve?
123 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Calgary Shepard for his question.
I think he would agree that the Bloc Québécois is not exactly a fan of gag orders. We do not understand why the government, which took a month to recall Parliament after that pointless election and then took another month to hand out mandate letters to its ministers, waited two months after Parliament resumed to introduce this farce of a bill, which will not fix the situation.
Yes, the Bloc Québécois completely agrees that we should take the time to do things right and study this matter carefully in committee.
110 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his excellent speech. It was very interesting.
Why does the member think the Liberals feel as though they can make seniors wait until May to fix their mistake? Why do the Liberals think they can make the poorest and most vulnerable of our seniors wait?
52 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I have been wondering the same thing for a long time. The only answer I can come up with is that there is a lack of will.
The Liberals have a lack of will to help the most vulnerable, and seniors are the people who have been most affected from day one of the pandemic.
It is incredible to hear government members claim that these are administrative errors that cannot be fully fixed because of technological and IT constraints.
However, the government was certainly able to arrange to send cheques to these same seniors for two years in a row. Members can see where I am going with this, but one day after the election was called, the government was fully able to issue a cheque. Fixing the administrative error, however—
134 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/11/22 1:43:27 p.m.
- Watch
Order. Resuming debate.
The hon. member for Mirabel.
8 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, a society is judged by the way it treats those who built it.
If the motion as moved is adopted, low-income seniors will have gone an entire year without their most significant source of income. The Liberal government deserves to be harshly judged for that.
To receive the guaranteed income supplement, a person needs to have worked and to be retired. The people whose GIS payments have been cut since July 1, 2021, are vulnerable seniors who lost a spouse, who were unlucky in their career or who continue to work after age 65, 67 or 69. It is unacceptable.
I would like to take this opportunity to commend my colleagues from Berthier—Maskinongé, Beauport—Limoilou, Manicouagan, La Prairie, Jonquière, Terrebonne, Joliette and Montcalm. They are all members of the Bloc Québécois caucus who have teaching experience. We cannot have enough teachers in the House because the Liberals are slow to learn.
The chair is neutral, and she knows that repetition is a teaching tool. We will therefore repeat that the wording must be changed. In the motion, the date needs to go back to March so that our seniors can get their payments immediately in March. Some progress has been made, but the payments need to arrive as soon as possible, and that is not what we have before us.
We will likely be told that it is not possible to do this immediately, because there are obstacles. The Bloc Québécois sent two letters to the minister and asked countless questions in the House. Our finance critic met with the minister on April 19, 2020, not 2021, but 2020. Nothing has been done to this day.
Trying to work with the government feels a bit like a waltz. The music starts, you take the first few steps and then, after three or four turns, you realize you have just moved around in a circle. Here we are today, still trying to get the payment moved up to March. That is the problem.
I know that the Liberals will say that they want to fast-track the motion, that we need to move quickly because this is urgent. However, the date set out in the motion is this summer. I do not understand why the Liberals are in such a rush to take their time, or why they want to hurry up and wait. Why pass this motion right now if they do not want to change the date? I need someone to explain it to me in simple terms, because none of this makes sense.
The date is critical. When someone is deprived of their income, that is critical. Things can be done quickly. I know that the government can move quickly when it wants to. For example, just before the last election they got $500 cheques sent out very quickly, without any problem. I therefore do not see why there would be a problem here.
I spoke in the House this week and asked for funding for health with no strings attached, funding for mental health and transfers. One of my colleagues across the way told me that I was out of touch with reality for asking the federal government for funding with no strings attached for programs that fall under provincial jurisdiction, Quebec jurisdiction.
I am given to introspection, so I thought about it. I wondered why he told me that and whether I was off-base. After thinking about it, I realized this week that the members on the other side of the House are living in the Liberal fantasy world.
It seems like a great place to live. It is a world where inflation does not exist for seniors and grocery and housing prices have not gone up. It is a world where the people who receive the GIS do not need it. Basically, it is a world where there is no gravity, because gravity is what makes us keep both feet on the ground and makes us think about the real people who need that help right now.
For instance, a woman who is over 70 came to see me at my riding office in Sainte‑Marthe‑sur‑le‑Lac. This woman closed her business last year. She earned very little and was unable to continue working, so she applied for the CERB. She was not given a choice as to the amount; it was a one-size-fits-all payment. Not long ago, she realized that her GIS would be slashed.
There is another woman, a 67-year-old from Sainte‑Anne‑des‑Plaines, whose GIS was cut off because she had earned a little money. She was not the only one to be cut off; her spouse was as well after he applied for the CERB.
We could talk about others, such as a 65-year-old woman from Mirabel who had earned a few dollars the previous years, was unable to continue working to make ends meet, applied for the CERB and now no longer receives the GIS. Those are the types of cases and people we are talking about.
Members on both sides of the House are getting to know me, and some must be thinking that the member for Mirabel has a flair for drama. However, I am simply repeating comments from officials with the Fédération de l'âge d'or du Québec, a Quebec seniors' advocacy group, who are describing this as a “tragedy” for the most vulnerable seniors. “Tragedy” is a direct quote, for that is the exact word they used.
People from the Association québécoise de défense des droits des personnes retraitées et préretraitées, a Quebec association that advocates for the rights of retirees and pre-retirees, are saying the same thing. At a meeting I had with them, they identified this administrative error as a major problem. I want to take this opportunity to recognize Pierre Lynch and Lorraine Brunelle, who sat down with me to explain how this absurd error is having a daily impact on the budgets of those seniors who need it the most.
When people who have their GIS taken away call our constituency office, we help them. We call the CRA. The answer we get is that they knew it was going to be calculated this way when they applied for the CERB and they should have planned ahead.
I spend time with seniors. They are intelligent people. They are the ones who built Quebec, who built our society, who paid taxes their whole lives, who built the houses we live in. They are also the people who taught me and made me the person I am today. They did the same for my colleagues, and I have to admit that, in many cases, they produced good results.
These people are capable of figuring things out. However, when the program was introduced, nobody was able to figure out that it would be calculated the way the government calculated CERB income to determine the GIS.
In teaching, there are rules. I am going to add this one. When we explain something to a whole lot of people but nobody understands, that is our fault.
When we create a program nobody understands, the fault lies with the government that created the program. It is a mistake, and the mistake needs to be fixed.
Our seniors are important. That cannot be overstated. Our seniors have suffered as much as anyone else. They are part of our society. They are active members of our society and our communities.
Recognizing that a mistake has been made is a sign of intelligence. In this case, one half of the mistake has been corrected. The government recognized that there was a miscalculation and that action had to be taken. However, time is of the essence. It is winter, seniors have bills to pay, and prices are going up. We must look after them and ensure that they start getting these payments in March.
1374 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, when I was listening to the member, I was reminded of the issue regarding how Canada's population growth is taking place, in particular among our seniors. It was brought to my attention that in his previous life and during the election in particular, the member talked about the age one should be to collect OAS. I believe he advocated that we should be looking at age 67. I wonder if he could tell us why he thinks it should be 67 and the advantages of that, from his perspective.
92 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, if the member was a sovereignist like me, he would know that I commented extensively on the Quebec pension plan at the Caisse de dépôt et placement. I think he is getting mixed up. If he would like to cross over to this side of the House and support sovereignty, I invite him to do so.
In 2015, the members opposite boasted about reducing the retirement age from 67 to 65 years of age. Once the Liberals were elected and the time came to help seniors, they decided that people only become seniors once they turn 75. I think they should sell mirrors here, in the boutique.
113 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I congratulate my colleague on his excellent and, as usual, very passionate speech. I have a simple question for him. My colleague proposed an amendment earlier about ensuring greater transparency.
Does my colleague agree with that amendment?
39 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, generally speaking, the policy is problematic in terms of transparency and understanding. It is very difficult for seniors and many other people to understand certain rules. We need to recognize that. As I said in my speech, when many intelligent people have a hard time understanding a rule, it could mean that the policy is not properly designed and needs more work. I think we should always keep that in mind.
That is an excellent question. I thank the hon. member.
83 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, as my hon. colleague pointed out, we are talking about the most vulnerable citizens in the country. We are talking about retirees, people in their twilight years and people who make so little money that they qualify for the GIS, which is reserved for seniors at the lowest income level. These are people who still have to work to make ends meet.
The NDP was very proud of the fact that in the last Parliament, we made something like 16 separate improvements to the CERB and kept closing loopholes in the government's programs. I am reminded of 2008, after the economic collapse, that the government of the day made, I think, $120 billion of credit available to the banks overnight.
Does my hon. colleague agree that the government has the resources and should have the ability to fix this problem to make sure that seniors who are hurt by this do not lose their GIS simply because of a flawed design in the CERB?
167 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, the answer is yes, absolutely. Another member made that point earlier. It is always hard to get money from Ottawa, except for the banks. Certain government offices need to be more available to seniors and vulnerable people, rather than to Bay Street.
44 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for standing up for seniors and emphasizing the urgency of the situation. I also like how he stressed the importance of communicating the changes in the program.
Can he elaborate on the importance of this, particularly for older people who might have limited internet access?
51 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, we are talking about people with limited access to the Internet, but in general, I would say that it is important to take care of all seniors. As I said before, these people gave their all. They built our communities. They are active members of society. They are still involved. They deserve all the help they can get.
60 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
