Old Age Security Act

Bill C-261, An Act to amend the Old Age Security Act (amount of full pension) · Second reading · now at second reading in the House Where it stands

What Bill C-261 would do

The bill would increase the full Old Age Security pension by 10% for all pensioners aged 65 and older. It would also raise the exemption for employment or self-employed earnings used to calculate the Guaranteed Income Supplement from $5,000 to $6,500.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

4 statements

Brad Vis, Mission—Matsqui—Abbotsford

Conservative
“Old age security already goes to people who make over $150,000. This program will cost over $100 billion in five years. Our children cannot afford to pay for this.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, right now in Canada, clawbacks for old age security commence at $95,000, but individuals aged 65 to 74 earning up to $152,000 and those over 75 earning up to $157,000 can still receive old age security. While I understand the intent of the legislation before us today and what the member is referring to, does she not understand that the costs for old age security would exceed $100 billion within the next five years? How are my children going to pay for this monumental expense?

Anna Roberts, King—Vaughan

Conservative
“I support this bill because seniors cannot afford to retire under the Liberal government. Seniors deserve to retire with dignity. We should do even more, like letting low-income seniors earn up to $10,000 before cutting their benefits.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank my colleague for bringing this to the forefront because I have been speaking to seniors. They are not retiring at 65 and they are not retiring at 75 because they cannot afford the cost of living that the Liberal government has placed on them. Even though I will be supporting this bill, which I will be speaking to shortly, we need to do better. The people who built this country deserve to retire in dignity and, right now, that is not happening. Does my hon. colleague think that maybe we should even increase the exemption for GIS to $10,000?

Anna Roberts, King—Vaughan

Conservative
“I support this bill. Seniors aged 65 to 74 face the same high costs for food and housing as seniors over 75, so they should get the same 10% pension increase. Seniors who work should also be allowed to keep more of what they earn without losing their benefits.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, it is always a pleasure to rise on behalf of the residents of King—Vaughan. Today, I am pleased to speak to Bill C-261, an act to amend the Old Age Security Act. I would like to thank my Bloc colleague for bringing forward this important piece of legislation and for contributing to the discussions on supporting seniors across the country. Before I begin, I want to acknowledge the seniors who built this country. As many members know, I was fortunate enough to be raised by my grandmother and my great-grandmother. They taught me some of life’s most valuable lessons. They taught me the importance of helping neighbours, living within one’s means, saving for a rainy day and leaving things better than we found them. Like so many grandparents across the country, they led by example. Seniors built the community that we live in. They raised families, started businesses, volunteered countless hours and contributed to the prosperity we enjoy as Canadians. After a lifetime of hard work, they deserve to retire with dignity and financial security, yet, for too many seniors today, that promise is increasingly out of reach. Canada is in the midst of an affordability crisis that is placing real pressure on fixed incomes. Housing costs have risen sharply. Grocery prices remain elevated and everyday essentials from utilities to transportation continue to strain household budgets. For seniors, there is no flexibility to simply earn more so that they can keep more. When prices rise, their purchasing power falls. This is the reality facing seniors across King—Vaughan and across this country. That is why Bill C-261 is so important. In 2021, the government increased old age security by 10% for seniors over the age of 75. What that decision did was create two classes of seniors. A senior who is 74 years old receives one level of support, while a senior who is 75 receives another. The question many seniors have asked me is simple. Why? Why is one senior considered more deserving than another? Why does affordability suddenly become a problem at age 75 but not at age 74? The reality is that inflation does not care how old someone is. The cost of groceries is the same. The cost of heating a home is the same. The cost of filling a prescription is the same. Many seniors between the ages of 65 and 74 are facing exactly the same challenges as seniors over the age of 75. They are living on fixed incomes and watching the cost of everyday necessities continue to rise. Over the past several years, I have spoken with seniors across the country. I have heard from people who are cutting back on groceries. I have heard from seniors who are delaying medical appointments, postponing home repairs and worried about whether their retirement savings will last. What concerns me the most is that many of the seniors facing the greatest financial pressures are those living alone. A single senior does not pay half the rent because they are one person. They do not pay half the hydro bill or half the property taxes. A single senior often faces higher costs relative to their income because there is only one with whom to share those expenses. Many of these seniors are widows. Many are women who spent decades raising families, caring for loved ones, and contributing to the communities. A 68-year-old widow living alone can face the same affordability challenges as someone who is 76 years old. The bill would also increase the guaranteed income supplement earnings exemption. This is another important measure. Many seniors choose to continue working. Some do so because they enjoy staying active. Others do so because they want to supplement their retirement income due to the affordability crisis the Liberal government has caused. Conservatives believe work should be rewarded, not punished. Seniors who are able to, want to and choose to work should be able to earn and keep more of their money without the clawbacks. At a time when many sectors continue to face labour shortages, experienced seniors bring tremendous value to workplaces through mentorship, training and leadership. We should be encouraging their contributions, not discouraging them. Recent data reinforces just how widespread the impact of the cost of living crisis on these seniors has become due to the Liberals. According to Food Banks Canada’s 2025 HungerCount report, seniors now account for 8.3% of all food bank clients, up from 6.8% in 2019. At the same time, food banks are seeing more than 2.2 million visits in a single month, breaking all records. The National Institute on Aging has also warned that financial vulnerability among older adults is increasingly driven by structural factors, such as housing costs, inflation and living alone. In particular, single seniors, especially older women, face a significantly higher risk of economic insecurity due to fixed incomes and the rising cost of essentials. Together, these findings show that affordability pressures are not limited to a narrow age group but are affecting seniors broadly across Canada, regardless of whether they are 65, 75 or 85 years old. I recognize that this bill faces challenges. Like its predecessor, Bill C-319, this bill will likely require a royal recommendation because it involves new public spending. I hope that my Liberal colleagues in government will recognize this session that affordability challenges do not begin at the age of 75. Seniors deserve fairness, and that means ensuring that support is available to all seniors who are struggling with the rising cost of living due to Liberal mismanagement. Conservatives have consistently stood up for seniors. Conservatives believe they should be able to afford groceries, medication and housing. Conservatives believe that if they choose to continue working, they should be rewarded rather than penalized by the government. Conservatives believe that after a lifetime of hard work, they deserve a government that respects their contributions and understands their challenges. As Parliament considers this bill, I hope members remember the senior who often falls through the cracks, the widow living alone, the senior renting on a fixed income, and the older Canadian who has done everything right but is struggling to keep up with the rising costs due to the affordability crisis that the Liberal government has created. Bill C-261 would not solve every challenge facing seniors, but it would help restore fairness to a system that currently treats some seniors differently simply because of their age. For those reasons, I will support Bill C-261, and I encourage all members of this House to do the same.

Dominique Vien, Bellechasse—Les Etchemins—Lévis

Conservative
“I support this bill. The government raised pensions by 10% for seniors 75 and older, but left out seniors aged 65 to 74. This bill gives them that same 10% raise to help with high living costs. It also lets working seniors keep more of their money before their benefits are cut.”
Official Hansard

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to rise, as we were not sure I would have enough time. I would like to thank my two colleagues from the Bloc Québécois, who spoke so eloquently, as well as my colleague from King—Vaughan, who gave a really poignant speech about seniors. She is able to do so because she travels around many ridings. As the Conservative Party of Canada’s critic for seniors, she is well aware of everything to do with seniors and what affects them, especially when it comes to the cost of living. I think that, in the House, we all have an opportunity in front of us. As members of Parliament, we have an opportunity to use our power to correct a situation that is hurting seniors aged 65 and over. I hope we all have enough dignity and foresight to show compassion and take action. The problem is very simple. In 2021, the Liberal government decided to take an important step, make a meaningful gesture, by increasing the pensions of seniors aged 75 and older by 10%. However, it stopped halfway. The government omitted a significant portion of seniors from its approach, namely people aged 65 to 74. They were completely excluded from this increase. That created inequity and an unusual situation. As parliamentarians, as people who meet with seniors all the time, we cannot allow this situation to continue. We absolutely must use this opportunity to fix this. Our Bloc Québécois colleagues tried to do so once. Everyone here agreed, except the Liberals. The bill died on the Order Paper because it required a royal recommendation, since it involved spending. My colleague worked tirelessly to reintroduce a bill. Since we are so stubborn, we decided to support it once again. We are giving our colleagues on the government side an opportunity to take action and get it right. Seniors are not asking for a handout. These are people who have worked hard all their lives, who have contributed to society and who, at age 65, need an income, especially during these very difficult times when the cost of living has skyrocketed to levels not seen in 40 years. While their fixed incomes remain the same, the cost of living continues to add to their headaches. Between paying for food, medication and housing, seniors can no longer make ends meet. What the bill says is that we will be fair and fix the situation. Someone somewhere made a mistake, and we are going to fix it. We will allow seniors aged 65 to 74 to receive the same increase, an increase of 10%, as was granted to seniors aged 75 and over in 2021. Another interesting approach in the bill is that it gives seniors who want to continue working the opportunity to do so without being penalized because their income is too high. That plays a role in determining the amount they can receive under the GIS. The bill tabled by Mrs. DeBellefeuille proposes an increase from $5,000 to $6,5000 to accurately reflect the situation of many seniors who decide to work. Some work because they have to in order to make ends meet. Others do so to keep up their spirits and stay in good health. Still, it is not right for the government to creep up from behind and take their money. I congratulate my colleague.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 128

  1. Oral Questions The Economy 11 statements
  2. Oral Questions Canadian Identity and Culture 6 statements
  3. Oral Questions The Economy 15 statements
  4. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Persons with Disabilities 2 statements
  6. Oral Questions International Trade 14 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 12 statements
  8. Oral Questions Infrastructure 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Health 6 statements
  10. Oral Questions Finance 2 statements
  11. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  12. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions The Economy 4 statements
  14. Government Orders Government Orders 50 statements
  15. Private Members' Business Old Age Security Act 12 statements
  16. Adjournment Proceedings Steel and Aluminum Industry 4 statements
  17. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements
  18. Adjournment Proceedings Adjournment Proceedings 4 statements