Hon. Alice Wong, P.C.

On May 6, 2013, Alice Wong answered one question about seniors during question period. The following is a transcript:

Hon. Judy Sgro (York West, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the Conservatives are not only raising taxes on middle-class families to fight the deficit, of course, that they created; they are also cutting important government services and programs. By making OAS harder to get, Conservatives have lifted $30,000 from the pockets of Canada’s lowest income seniors.

Yet, of course, this is not a new tack, coming from the same group that went back on its word and taxed income trusts. Do members remember that?

Just tell me, why is it that you have it in for the seniors? Why are you making Canada’s seniors—

The Speaker:
Order, please.

The hon. member well knows that she has to address her comments through the Chair, not directly at other members.

The hon. Minister of State for Seniors.

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting seniors. We took actions, which included the highest GIS increase in a quarter of a century; a low-tax plan that has helped remove almost 400,000 seniors from the tax rolls completely; additional funding for affordable housing for seniors; and increased funding for the new horizons for seniors program.

The Liberal leader seems to want to talk about seniors, as opposed to acting on their behalf. He voted against the many measures we have introduced that better the lives of our senior citizens. Is he still against them?

On February 27, 2013, Alice Wong answered one question about pensions during question period. The following is a transcript:

Hon. Judy Sgro (York West, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, we all know the Prime Minister’s view that seniors should worker longer and harder to qualify for their old age pension. Seniors want to know why they are being forced to take on more debt because the government is unwilling to help them.

Conservatives waste millions of dollars to advertise their so-called economic action plan but offer only cuts for working-class families and seniors. Why does the Conservative vision for prosperity and success exclude Canada’s seniors?

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, when it comes to seniors poverty, our government has a record we can be proud of. Canada has one of the lowest senior poverty rates in the world, thanks in part to our actions, which include removing hundreds of thousands of seniors from the tax rolls completely, making significant investment in affordable housing for low-income seniors and introducing the largest GIS increase in a quarter of a century. Canadians know that they can count on our government to deliver for seniors.

On October 1, 2012, Alice Wong answered two questions about seniors during question period. The following is a transcript:

[Translation]

Mr. Bernard Trottier (Etobicoke—Lakeshore, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, today, we are celebrating the second annual National Seniors Day. The government created this special day to officially recognize and celebrate our seniors and all that they have done to make Canada a great country.

[English]

Could the Minister of State for seniors please tell the House what other action our government has taken to support seniors, who so richly deserve it.

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, our government has been working hard to increase access to services and benefits for seniors while promoting ways for them to stay active, engaged and informed. However, there is more.

We have increased funding for the new horizons program, taken action against elder abuse, increased the GIS by biggest amount in 25 years, and put OAS on a long-term sustainable path.

Our government is standing up for seniors and we will continue to do so.

…

[Translation]

Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, today is National Seniors Day. Unfortunately, many seniors have nothing to celebrate because the Conservatives are making seniors shoulder the burden of their cost-cutting measures. The Conservatives have raised the eligibility age for old age security from 65 to 67, reduced provincial health transfers, and the list goes on.

Can the minister tell us why the Conservatives have chosen to cut services to seniors?

[English]

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting seniors.

We have taken action, including the biggest GIS increase in a quarter century. Our low-tax plan has helped remove almost 400,000 seniors from the tax rolls completely. There is additional funding for affordable housing for seniors, increased funding for the new horizons for seniors program, and we continue increasing awareness of elder abuse and have introduced legislation to ensure there are tough sentences for those who abuse seniors.

I would like to encourage Canadians to visit seniors.gc.ca as a resource to help guide them to the services and benefits they deserve.

On May 16, 2012, Alice Wong answered one question about pensions during question period. The following is a transcript:

Hon. Scott Brison (Kings—Hants, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, has the public service provided the Minister of Finance with an estimate of how many dollars the government will save by raising the OAS age from 65 to 67, yes or no?

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, there will be no reductions to seniors’ pensions.

The opposition parties are missing the point. This is not about savings. Our changes will put old age security on a sustainable path so it will be there when Canadians need it. Changes made will be gradual, beginning in 2023 and coming into full effect in 2029.

We are also providing Canadians with the option to defer OAS and collect later at a higher rate, if they wish.

On April 26, 2012, Alice Wong made a speech in the House of Commons on the following opposition motion:

“That this House reject the government’s plan to raise the age of eligibility for Old Age Security and the Guaranteed Income Supplement from 65 to 67 years even though the current system is financially sustainable.”

The following is a transcript:

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Nepean—Carleton.

I rise today to respond to the motion put forth by the member for London—Fanshawe. We oppose this motion.

It is imperative to reiterate some facts and be clear about them.

No current recipients of old age security will see any reduction in their benefits because of these proposed changes. These changes will gradually increase the age of eligibility for OAS from 65 to 67 years starting in 2023 with full implementation by 2029. This means our government is giving Canadians up to 17 years to plan and adjust accordingly.

Unfortunately, it appears that members opposite continue to take a head in the sand approach to the whole issue of OAS sustainability.

Our Conservative government is acting now to ensure the sustainability of OAS for future generations, for our children and our grandchildren. That is why we have come up with a reasonable plan to ensure all Canadians can continue to count on OAS for a more secure retirement future.

I do not believe anyone can dispute that our government is committed to ensuring seniors have the highest possible quality of life. I am proud of the work we have done to strengthen Canada’s retirement income system, and more broadly to help address issues that matter to seniors.

As a result of actions taken by our government, seniors and pensioners will receive $2.5 billion in additional targeted tax relief this fiscal year. We have introduced pension income splitting and have increased the age limit for maturing pensions and RRSPs. As a result of these actions, 380,000 seniors have been removed completely from the tax rolls. What does this really mean to the seniors I have met across this country? It means that more money will go directly into their own pockets to spend or save as they see fit.

Sadly, if it were up to the opposition parties, they would have raised taxes on all seniors, not reduced them. Whether it was a job-killing carbon tax, an increase in the GST or any number of other tax increase proposals put forward by the opposition parties, one thing is clear: if either the NDP or the Liberal Party were in power, the cost of living for Canada’s seniors would be higher.

Enough of pointing out the obvious, negative, damaging effects the opposition would inflict on Canada’s seniors if they were in power; rather, I would like to continue the discussion on how our government has delivered, and will continue to deliver, for seniors.

We have strengthened the support of the retirement income system and invested in a GIS top-up benefit for Canada’s most vulnerable seniors. In fact, it was the single largest increase to the GIS in over 25 years. What did the opposition do? Once again both parties voted against it. In total, this top-up provided additional annual benefits for more than 680,000 low income seniors.

Going back a little further, in budget 2008 we increased the amount that can be earned before the GIS is reduced to $3,500, so that recipients can keep more of their hard-earned money without any reduction in GIS benefits. Once again, as they have been known to do, almost as if they were in a coalition, both parties voted against this measure.

The CPP was modernized in 2009 to make it more flexible for those transitioning out of the workforce and to better reflect the way Canadians currently live, work and retire.

We built a better framework for federally regulated registered pension plans, including ensuring that an employer fully funds benefits, even if the pension plan is terminated. We expanded pension options with the introduction of pooled registered pension plans for millions of Canadians who have not previously had access to a large-scale, low-cost, professionally administered company pension plan.

Shifting gears for a moment, I would also like to discuss what many consider to be the greatest policy innovation in a generation to help Canadians save for their retirement, the tax-free savings account, TFSA, which we introduced in budget 2008. I do not think I need to tell members which way the NDP voted, but I will anyway. That is right. Again, the NDP voted against it. That is shameful because the TFSA is particularly beneficial to Canada’s seniors, as withdrawals from a TFSA do not affect income supports such as the age credit or OAS and GIS benefits. The TFSA also benefits seniors by giving them a savings vehicle to meet their ongoing savings needs.

As well, there have been several other initiatives that have demonstrated our support for seniors. We have eliminated the mandatory retirement age for federally regulated workers unless there is a bona fide occupational requirement. This allows the choice for Canadians to decide how long they wish to remain active in the workforce. We have also provided $400 million over two years for the construction of new housing units for low-income seniors. Since 2006, we have provided $220 million into the targeted initiative for older workers. This program is a federal-provincial-territorial employment program that provides a range of employment services for unemployed older workers in vulnerable communities. I am proud to report that about 75% of older workers who participate in the TIOW go on to find new employment. That is something we can be proud of.

I have just listed the unprecedented support our government has given to seniors since 2006. Let me highlight some other positive changes that were announced in our most recent budget. We announced our government will be working with a third-quarter project to assist seniors who are looking for jobs. For example, our government has for the first time introduced proactive enrolment for OAS benefits. These changes, which will start in 2013, will reduce the obligation of many seniors to apply for benefits and help ensure seniors receive the benefits they deserve.

Unfortunately, we have heard the same fearmongering and misinformation from the opposition about the sustainability of the OAS. Whether it be through misleading and confusing op-eds sent to local newspapers or partisan mail-outs and petitions that misrepresent the facts, the opposition parties have engaged in a reckless campaign of misinformation aimed at scoring cheap political points. We have heard a lot of questions about the savings associated with the proposal. Such questions miss the point entirely. We are taking these actions to ensure the survival of this benefit for future generations. We are implementing these measures to give predictability and certainty to those preparing for their retirement.

It is particularly hypocritical of the Liberal Party to be grandstanding on such an issue. This was the same matter that Paul Martin attempted to change in the mid-1990s to ensure the sustainability of this benefit. Unfortunately, the Liberals lacked the conviction to show real leadership and decided to pass the buck to a future generation and a future government to make the tough choices in the long-term interests of our nation. It is no surprise that Canadians elected a strong, stable, national Conservative majority government.

I would ask my hon. colleagues across the way to put aside their partisan blinders and to think of the long-term sustainability of this program. There is a greater interest than their perceived short-term political gain in considering this issue.

We need to act now to provide Canadians the certainty they need to plan for their retirements. We have heard from many private sector economists and the chief actuary, as well as pension and financial experts alike. They agree that the increased demand of a rapidly aging population is going to threaten the sustainability of the old age security program.

I would ask opposition parties to get their heads out of the sand and to stop their wilful ignorance of the very real challenges that face our nation because of an aging population and to join with the government in voting against the motion.

Ms. Ève Péclet (La Pointe-de-l’Île, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, I just have one question. Did the government consult the provinces before changing the age to 67? We all know that the provinces will have to cope with the two years that seniors are not going to receive money.

[Translation]

For now, the economic burden will be downloaded onto the provinces and they will have to deal with it. The money that this government refuses to invest for seniors will have to be invested by the provinces.

Why is this government not assuming its responsibilities, instead of chucking them onto the provinces?

[English]

Hon. Alice Wong:
Mr. Speaker, it is exactly what the government has done. We have already made it clear in our budget that any net loss that might incur to provinces and territories because of the changes will be compensated by our government.

There are 11 years to discuss this. We will keep working on this in the next provincial and federal government meetings.

Hon. Gerry Byrne (Humber—St. Barbe—Baie Verte, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the hon. member has suggested that she has solid information and knowledge of the government’s intentions with regard to the old age security program and the GIS program. She has suggested there will be no changes to any current recipient.

I would like to ask the honourable member this, since she has personal and intimate knowledge of the government’s intentions. The current policy of allowing the optioning of registered retirement income funds for the purposes of the calculation of GIS has currently been deemed illegal by the Tax Court of Canada. It has said that within the Old Age Security Act there are no provisions to allow for the optioning of RRIF income, yet the government continues to do so. It has suggested that if the government were to ban this practice, according to policy, it would be negatively impacting current recipients of old age security and GIS benefits.

Is it the intention of the Government of Canada to amend the Old Age Security Act to allow what it is currently doing under policy to occur statutorily by an amendment to the Old Age Security Act to allow the optioning of RRIF income for the purposes of the calculation of eligibility to the GIS program?

Hon. Alice Wong:
Mr. Speaker, the question we are debating right now is whether we should extend the age of eligibility from 65 to 67. That is what we are debating right now.

Let us listen to what some of our economists have said.

“What is less reasonable is the quasi-hysterical and downright demagogic reactions from opposition critics to what was a fairly modest proposal”. That was from the Montreal Gazette.

Here is another quote. “Without any changes, Canada will be hard-pressed to provide any social or institutional programs beyond seniors’ income supplements and health care.” That was in a Star Phoenix editorial.

Another quote says, “opposition parties’ efforts to panic Canadians that the…government is targeting seniors are as disingenuous as they are dangerous”. That was in a Star Phoenix editorial.

Another quote says, “The fact of the matter is Canadians are getting older, the demands on the system are getting greater, and the costs are going up”. That was said by Patricia Croft, economist, The Bottom Line, CBC The National.

All these quotes just confirm that our move is in the right direction.

On April 4, 2012, Alice Wong answered one question about pensions during question period. The following is a transcript:

Mr. Mike Wallace (Burlington, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, our government understands the importance of a secure and dignified retirement for people who have spent their lives building Canada through hard work. That is why in 2006, we have taken action to ensure that retirement income is sustainable and is there when Canadians need it.

Will the Minister of State for Seniors please update the House on the measures we are taking to ensure that Canadians’ retirement income is sustainable today and tomorrow?

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Burlington for the question. That is exactly what we are doing.

That is why, since 2006, we have introduced such measures as pension income splitting, billions in annual tax relief for seniors and the largest GIS increase in 25 years.

But we also need to ensure that future generations can count on sustainable retirement benefits when they need them. Changes made to OAS will be phased in between 2023 and 2029, giving Canadians up to 17 years to plan and adjust accordingly. No current recipients will be affected. That is the good message for all Canadians.

On March 8, 2012, Alice Wong answered one question about seniors during question period. The following is a transcript:

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, a shocking 46.5% of elderly Canadian women live alone in poverty. This is double the poverty rate for elderly men in Canada. Seniors’ poverty particularly touches aboriginal and immigrant women.

Will the government implement a real strategy to fight poverty and make reforms to our pension system to lift all senior women out of poverty?

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the fact remains that our government is working hard for all seniors. It was our government that introduced a low tax plan that removed thousands of seniors from the tax rolls completely. It was our government that introduced pension income splitting and the largest GIS increase in a quarter century. It was her party that voted against all of these.

Canadians know that they can count on this government to deliver for seniors.

On February 2, 2012, the House of Commons debated an NDP motion, “That the House reject calls by the Prime Minister to balance the Conservative deficit on the backs of Canada’s seniors by means such as raising the age of eligibility for Old Age Security and call on the government to make the reduction and eventual elimination of seniors’ poverty a cornerstone of the next budget.” The vote for the motion will be on February 6, 2012.

The transcript of Alice Wong’s remarks on this debate is as follows:

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Madam Speaker, I will be splitting my time with the member for Simcoe—Grey.

I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond to this misleading motion and talk about what our government is doing for Canada’s seniors. In my role as minister, I have travelled across Canada meeting many seniors. I have listened to what they consider to be important. Let me be clear. No senior who is receiving benefits today will lose a penny because of the changes we will be proposing. Any changes will be announced with a long notice period and be brought in gradually.

It is unfortunate that members of the opposition are attempting to scare seniors to score cheap political points. This motion falsely attempts to connect deficit reduction with the necessary changes to the OAS. There will be no change to the OAS until well after the budget has been balanced.

I can assure Canada’s seniors that the support our government has shown them will continue. We all know someone, a family member, friend or neighbour, who is a senior. We care about their financial future. We want to ensure that the social programs we have come to rely on are sustainable for the next generation.

As someone who was not born here, I can speak from personal experience. Canada is an example to the world when it comes to the care of seniors. We are committed to ensuring seniors have the highest possible quality of life for today and tomorrow. We must ensure the programs and services that give us this quality of life are sustainable for all citizens in the future. Striking this balance is not a choice. It is a necessity. Good choices now mean we will be able to maintain our quality of life today and in the future.

I will take a few minutes to talk about what Canada is doing to help seniors currently. Our government has consistently shown a commitment to helping the most vulnerable seniors across the country, not just with promises but with action.

This summer I was excited to see the new guaranteed income supplement top-up benefit start helping Canada’s most vulnerable seniors. This top-up is the biggest increase to the GIS in 25 years. It represents a $1.5 billion investment over the next five years. This top-up works out to $600 annually for a single senior and $840 for a couple. That is just the latest improvement we have made to the GIS.

We increased the GIS in 2006 and again in 2007, for a total increase of 7% above regular adjustments for inflation. In budget 2008, we increased the GIS earnings exemption from $500 to $3,500, meaning that GIS recipients keep more of their hard-earned money. We also reduced bureaucratic red tape by introducing automatic GIS renewal for seniors who file annual income taxes. Our work does not stop there. There are a number of areas where seniors want action and we are responding.

Seniors want leadership in their communities. In budget 2011, we provided $10 million over two years to increase funding for the new horizons for seniors program. This helps seniors use their leadership, energy and skills to benefit communities across Canada. Everywhere I travel seniors tell me how much they appreciate low taxes, thanks to our government. We have provided over $2.3 billion a year in additional tax relief to seniors through measures such as income splitting and increasing the age credit.

Affordable housing is an important measure to combat senior poverty. We invested $400 million over two years under Canada’s economic action plan for the construction of housing units for low-income seniors.

Now more than ever, good health is a concern of seniors. We are supporting positive and active aging through the collaborative age-friendly communities initiative, physical activity tips for older adults and falls prevention initiatives.

Having a voice in decisions is also important to seniors. This is why we created the National Seniors Council in 2007 to provide advice to the federal government on the well-being and quality of life of our seniors.

We proudly established October 1 as National Seniors Day in Canada. On this day, we recognize the significant and on-going contributions seniors make to families, communities, workplaces and society.

I think we can all agree that seniors abuse cannot be tolerated. That is why in budget 2008 we invested $13 million over three years to help seniors and others recognize signs and symptoms of elder abuse and to provide information on available support.

Outcomes matter. The sum of the efforts I have highlighted so far today are resulting in a better Canada, a safer Canada, a Canada that respects seniors and makes them a full partner in the decisions we make as a country. Statistics show we are moving in the right direction.

The low income rate for seniors has declined dramatically from 21% in 1980 to 5% in 2009. The low income rate among seniors in Canada is now one of the lowest rates among member countries of the OECD. That is a record of which we can be proud.

To stay on the right track, we have to plan for the future. That starts with looking at facts, not just opinions, because facts give us a very good picture of what the future will look like, both in terms of opportunities and challenges.

Canada, like many other countries, is facing major demographic challenges because of an aging population. Our aging workforce will present a growing and serious economic challenge for Canada and other developed countries. In Canada the number of seniors will nearly double within two decades.

Among that growing number of seniors, the number of basic OAS pension beneficiaries is also expected to grow, from 4.7 million reported in 2010 to 9.3 million projected by 2030. Population aging involves both current and future generations.

In the future, there will be fewer workers to support higher costs of programs such as the old age security, which is funded from general tax revenues on a “pay-as-you-go basis”. OAS benefits are paid out of the tax revenues collected each year. As the ratio of workers to seniors changes, it will mean less workers have to pay for more benefits.

Currently there are approximately four workers for every retiree. By 2030, that number will have changed to two workers for every retiree. This is why it is critical that we must make changes to the OAS program. As the ratio changes, the cost to the taxpayer of these benefits becomes increasingly high.

The Canada pension plan is a different story. This program does not involve any tax dollars. It is entirely funded through the contributions of employers, employees and the self-employed. These contributions are invested over the life of a worker and grow to cover the cost of their retirement benefits.

The chief actuary recently examined the CPP and said that it was sound for the next 75 years. Therefore, it is clear that we need to make changes to the OAS to ensure our retirement security system stays strong and that it is available to for our children and our grandchildren.

I can assure Canadians that we will provide the time required for younger generations to plan for their retirement. Let me reiterate that people currently receiving OAS will not lose a cent.

The NDP is attempting to confuse seniors. The changes we are proposing will happen long after the budget is balanced. This has nothing to do with deficit reduction. Whether it be through lower taxes, increased funding to fight poverty or simply to make our economy stronger, Canada’s seniors are the winners.

Because the motion does not reflect the intent of the government and because it is hopelessly misguided, we simply cannot support it. That is why our government will vote against the motion. I encourage all members of the House to do the same.

[Translation]

Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, after listening to the hon. member’s speech, I wonder who is trying to scare whom here. The government talks about the situation being critical, but the report by the Government of Canada’s chief actuary says that our old age security system is viable and that the challenge of the aging population is a one-time challenge. We are not the ones who are trying to scare anyone. What is more, we are not trying to scare seniors. If gradual cuts to our programs and services are being announced then it is our young people who should be scared. People retiring in five, 10 or 30 years should be scared. They are the ones who probably should be worried about this government’s cuts.

Does the minister promise to open discussions before her party makes changes to programs and services for seniors? Does she promise to consult people and work with the other parties to come up with a comprehensive solution to a global challenge?

[English]

Hon. Alice Wong:
Mr. Speaker, to be very clear, there will be no changes to benefits seniors currently receive. We will ensure any changes are done with substantial notice and an adjustment period in a way that does not affect current retirees or those close to retirement. It gives others plenty of time to adjust and plan for their retirement.

Ms. Kirsty Duncan (Etobicoke North, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, expert evidence is that OAS will not cause the federal budget to crash. Instead of pushing through something during this session of Parliament, the government should publish a white paper that lays out the problem that needs to be solved, along with a range of possible solutions that Canadians can consider.

My constituents in Etobicoke North want real options for improving their pension outlook for the next several decades. It appears the government is considering raising the age of eligibility from 65 to 67. Only people who depend on OAS to stay out of poverty will have to put off retiring. Higher income earners, those whose OAS is already clawed back through their taxes, will not be affected.

Does the hon. member think this is a fair and equitable solution?

Hon. Alice Wong:
Mr. Speaker, we will not put the financial security and well-being of seniors at risk. We will take balanced, responsible and prudent action to ensure the OAS remains sustainable for future generations of Canadians.

Ms. Elizabeth May (Saanich—Gulf Islands, GP):
Mr. Speaker, we hear there will be reasonable time. I find the message from the government confusing. We are told on one hand that we are panicking needlessly about things the Prime Minister said in Davos. On the other hand, seniors are very concerned and so are people approaching retirement age.

When the minister says that there will be reasonable time for a phase-in of, for instance, moving the point of earliest receipt of benefits to age 67, how much time does the minister think is reasonable?

Hon. Alice Wong:
Mr. Speaker, we are currently working on that and when the budget comes down, the details will be there.

Mrs. Kelly Block (Saskatoon—Rosetown—Biggar, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for the tremendous work she does on behalf of our seniors.

The government is acting responsibly. We are ensuring that Canada’s seniors have a secure future as well as for generations to come. The NDP and Liberals are misleading and scaring seniors because the facts are clear. If we do nothing, OAS will become unsustainable.

Which initiative implemented by the government does the minister hear about the most that is helping Canadian seniors?

Hon. Alice Wong:
Mr. Speaker, what we have done for seniors with the new horizon program to keep them active and healthy, also the increase in the GIS, the continual care of our seniors with housing and all the other things I mentioned in my speech are very much welcome. They thank me and ask me to bring their positive response back to the government.

On December 12, 2011, Alice Wong answered two questions about seniors during question period. The following is a transcript:

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, there is an elderly couple in Toronto. She has asthma and bronchitis. He has Parkinson’s. They can barely make ends meet. In fact, they just won a contest because of the depth of their needs. However, there are no winners here. Three hundred thousand seniors live in poverty. The government offers no help. Seniors should not have to turn to a contest just to keep their heads above water.

When will the government stop ignoring seniors and start actually helping them?

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the member opposite for bringing up this very important issue.

Seniors’ poverty is something which all Canadians should be concerned about. That is why our government has been taking action. We have worked hard to put more money into the pockets of seniors by cutting taxes and investing billions in affordable housing, but it does not stop there. We have also introduced pension income splitting and have provided the largest GIS increase in a quarter century.

Canadians know that they can count on this government to deliver for our seniors.

[Translation]

Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure the minister realizes how critical the situation is for seniors because she refuses to admit that more needs to be done. Some 300,000 seniors are living in poverty. It is not just a statistic; it is a hidden crisis and the government is doing nothing about it. This winter, seniors will have to choose between paying their electricity bills or buying groceries. It is not an easy choice. In order for our seniors to be able to live in dignity, it would take only $700 million, which is half of what this government has given in gifts to the banks this year alone.

Why does this government help CEOs instead of seniors?

[English]

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, our government is committed to supporting seniors. The largest GIS increase in a quarter century has put more money into the pockets of 1.6 million more seniors. Our low-tax plan has removed 380,000 seniors from the tax rolls completely. Our investment to combat financial elder abuse is raising awareness so that the money seniors have worked so hard to save is not lost.

I have also consulted with stakeholders around the country and have seen first-hand the positive impacts made, thanks to our government.

On December 8, 2011, Alice Wong answered two questions about seniors during question period. The following is a transcript:

Ms. Irene Mathyssen (London—Fanshawe, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, this government’s record on seniors is shameful. Many seniors are struggling to pay for food, housing and medication. This is putting them into situations of dependence and making them more vulnerable to elder abuse. The Conservatives’ out-of-touch plan has left hundreds of thousands of Canadian seniors living in poverty. That is what New Democrats voted against.

Conservative policy is insulting and abusive to seniors. Why will the government not take seniors’ poverty seriously with a plan to protect the most vulnerable?

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, any form of abuse is unacceptable. Following the introduction of a very successful awareness campaign, which will continue through 2012, we also increased funding for elder abuse awareness programs including new horizons.

Furthermore, the Minister of Justice and I have met with stakeholders across Canada. We look forward to fulfilling our commitment to further protect vulnerable seniors.

[Translation]

Ms. Lysane Blanchette-Lamothe (Pierrefonds—Dollard, NDP):
Mr. Speaker, to “further protect” does not necessarily mean the government is doing enough.

Even though this government is boasting about its achievements, the reality is that today an increasing number of seniors rely on food banks or charities to make ends meet. To tell seniors living in poverty that they will not have to pay taxes is not going to solve the issue of poverty. All Canadians have the right to age with dignity, not just those who had more luck.

When will this government stop repeating the same old tune and finally provide real security to our seniors?

[English]

Hon. Alice Wong (Minister of State (Seniors), CPC):
Mr. Speaker, our government continues to take strong action to support seniors. This includes providing billions in annual tax relief for seniors and pensioners, removing hundreds of thousands of seniors from the tax rolls completely, increasing the GIS exemption and introducing the largest GIS increase in a quarter century.

We have also made significant investments in affordable housing for low-income seniors and introduced pension income splitting. We will keep working hard to deliver for seniors.