- Member of Parliament
- NDP
- North Island—Powell River
- British Columbia
- Voting Attendance: 65%
- Expenses Last Quarter: $145,542.18
- Government Page
- Apr/24/23 7:02:54 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it is interesting that the largest impact I see for seniors are things that the NDP asked for. We said to the government, “If you do not play with us nicely, we are not going to support you unless you do these things.” It is great that the government is announcing the things that are in the budget that the NDP proposed, such as the dental benefit and the doubling of the GST. What I am not hearing is anything about how there is going to be real action taken, especially for single seniors. I am worried about all seniors, but I know that single seniors in particular, largely women, are really struggling. They are talking about the financial challenges they have. There are some really common-sense responses that could be done. When is that going to happen?
The other thing I heard the member talk about was the supports for low-income renters. In my riding, there is so little housing. It is not about getting the extra money to pay rent; it is about actually having somewhere to live. Is there going to be an investment in housing that is going to sustain seniors in a meaningful and respectful way?
Those are a couple of my questions. I certainly hope that the member will take it back to his government, that single seniors deserve better and that we need more rental units, especially in rural and remote communities, because there simply are not any there.
252 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/24/23 6:55:41 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I appreciate this opportunity to talk about seniors.
Across my riding of North Island—Powell River, I am hearing from more and more seniors who are struggling to make ends meet. They are having a hard time affording food, affording their medication and being able to pay for the key things that make their life reasonable.
I am also hearing from more and more seniors in rental units who are being evicted and have nowhere else to go. It is very concerning to listen to the organizations that work so hard to keep people fed and housed in our region and understand how many seniors are falling through the cracks.
I was able to ask a question several weeks ago about the fact that OAS for seniors is being increased only for seniors 75 and older, which means that seniors aged 65 to 74 are really struggling. It was very interesting to me when a constituent got a hold of my office and talked about the fact that her neighbour, who is over 75, received a letter informing her that her old age security would be increased by about $200 a month, which was a huge relief to that senior. However, the senior who wrote to me is not near 75 yet; she has a few years until she gets there. She talked about how hard it was. She looked it up online, trying to figure out why she did not get the increase, and then she realized it was because of age. This did not reflect her needs.
My question to the government was simply this: Given the reality of inflation, why is the government telling seniors 65 to 74 that they do not require this, especially some of our most vulnerable seniors, who are struggling with poverty?
When I look at the budget, I am very happy to finally see dental care for seniors. I have heard from seniors across my riding, some of whom have waited outside the door with their information because they heard I was fighting for seniors to get dental care. It was absolutely sad to hear the stories of the extreme pain and then often having to wait years, saving money and trying to find a way to pay for root canals and the different procedures they needed. One senior said to me that they could afford a couple of hundred dollars it cost every year to get their teeth cleaned, but they could not afford anything else. Therefore, whenever they had a problem, such as a cavity, it could take them a few years to pay for it. Thus, I am really pleased that dental care is in the budget, but I am unhappy that we do not see anything else.
We know that we forced the government to do this. Two years ago, the Liberals voted against dental care for seniors in this country. We made them do it, and I am glad that it is here. Nevertheless, too many seniors are falling through the cracks, and we could do something about their suffering in this country if the government had the political will to do so.
I want to point out that single seniors are perhaps the most impacted group of seniors. Their cost of living is two-thirds the cost of a couple, and they have to make up that resource for themselves. We know that a lot of single seniors are renting; the cost of housing is significantly higher than it was, and it is only increasing.
Single Seniors for Tax Fairness has come up with some really important ideas that I was hoping to see in the budget. However, we did not see those things reflected in the budget, which I think is very unfortunate.
We need to make sure that the seniors of this country are getting the supports they need so that they can live according to a bar of dignity. Having the OAS increased for those seniors between 65 and 74 would bring up that bar of dignity. It is not the only solution, but it is a solution that this government could put in place fairly quickly if it had the political will.
I am back here again fighting hard for seniors because they deserve to have the financial support to live with dignity. Single seniors with a very fixed income deserve to feel that they can live with dignity, and too many across this country are making decisions between appropriate housing, clothing, bills, heat and medication. I think Canada should do so much more for seniors, and I wonder why the Liberal government does not agree.
777 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am very happy to be here today as the seniors critic for the NDP to talk about Bill C-295, an act to amend the Criminal Code targeted at neglect of vulnerable adults.
This bill would do two things. First, it would amend the Criminal Code to create a specific offence for long-term care facilities, their owners and managers to fail to provide the necessaries of life to residents of the facilities. Second, it would allow the court to make an order prohibiting the owners and the managers of such facilities from being, through employment or volunteering, in charge of or in a position of trust or authority towards vulnerable adults and to consider as an aggravating factor for the purpose of sentencing the fact that an organization failed to perform the legal duty that it owed to a vulnerable adult.
I am going to be in support of this bill. We saw dreadful outcomes during the pandemic. So many seniors across this country faced challenges that we cannot imagine and then there were deaths beyond our imagination. It is really important, as we remember this time, to remember the men and women in uniform who serve this country, who were sent in to some long-term care facilities and saw things they were horrified to see in their own country.
It is really important to understand that when we ask those in our military to step up for us, they are used to stepping up outside of our country in these kinds of circumstances. They were in this country and saw seniors who had died just because of neglect, because they were dehydrated. This is Canada and that should never happen. Those folks did a huge service to us, something I hope they never have to do in their own country again.
It is also important to point out that the vast majority of seniors never enter long-term care. That is important. I hear from the Seniors Advocate in British Columbia all the time that we should remember most people stay at home and that is where they end their lives. However, when seniors move into such facilities, families and loved ones need to know those people are safe and that standards are in place, something they can put their trust in.
We know that sometimes families move their loved ones to be closer to them from one province or territory to another. What is surprising is that the standards are different in each part of this country, which really leaves increased vulnerability. I appreciate that the government did table some long-term care standards, but the thing that was terrifying to me is that they are voluntary. A lot of good work was done in looking at those standards, making sure they made sense for long-term care, and now we see that they are voluntary.
This worries me because it provides a huge risk to seniors and the people who love them most. Again and again, we see loved ones doing the best that they can. If they live far away or there are any kinds of challenges, knowing that their loved one is in a long-term care facility and not getting the support that they want makes people feel ill.
I am going to quote something important by Candace Rennick, CUPE's national secretary-treasurer, who said:
Voluntary standards did not protect the 17,000 residents of long-term care homes who have died so far because of COVID-19. Canadians want better protections for seniors. This country needs standards that are backed by the force of law. People need to know that their loved ones will spend their last days living with dignity and respect. They need to know that there will be penalties and consequences for long-term care service providers that don’t follow the rules.
If all we have in this country is a national voluntary standard, there will never be the level of accountability that I think Canadians want to see.
This bill would amend the Criminal Code, but I am afraid that it will not do all that it must to protect seniors. We need more long-term support for them and a practice of having more accountability. What this really means to me is that when seniors die in this situation, there need to be actual charges laid, and we are not seeing that. We are seeing families taking on long-term care facilities, and that is not right. There needs to be a process and we need to start having charges laid. That is a real deterrent.
Graham Webb, executive director and former staff lawyer of the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly, has called the Criminal Code amendments “a very viable approach”. However, he said, “I'm really not aware of a single charge ever having being laid for the neglect of a long-term care resident. I think it’s important that the criminal justice system is able to respond when we see such flagrant cases of institutional abuse and neglect of older adults.”
I think that is startling. Even if we see a minor change to the code, it is still not fulfilling the other end, which is the actual movement toward laying those charges and holding people accountable.
Members know just as well as I do that when people are held to account, other people observing start paying attention. I think it is shameful that in this country seniors are so vulnerable that they can be sacrificed without a thought. They built our country. We owe them so much more, and we owe them dignity.
One of the things I found particularly painful in my role as the seniors critic is how many people with loved ones in a seniors facility have come to my door and talked about how hard they worked to try to look after them. They could not always be there the way they wanted to, because they had to work or because they had children. Then, when they went to visit, they saw things that horrified them, and they fought in that system the best that they could and with everything they had. Now that their loved one is gone, the pain is so raw that they do not want to talk about it because of the guilt they feel. They feel guilt because our system is broken. That is wrong, and that is why we must fix this.
To me, it goes back to the simple reality that we need to see the long-term care standards in legislation. We need to raise the bar. I get that every province and territory wants to do their own thing. I respect that, but let us make this the bar. If any province or territory wants to be higher than that bar, good for them. Let us make sure that no senior in all of Canada falls below it. Let us make sure that no family is in a position that they would think of moving their loved one from one province to another, simply so that they get better care. That is ridiculous.
I think Canadians need to listen to those on the front lines. For example, Natalie Mehra, executive director of the Ontario Health Coalition, noted that there has been “no consequence whatsoever” for the abuse and neglect that was exposed during the pandemic, or for the needless deaths of residents due to poor infection control and non-COVID-19 reasons, such as dehydration and starvation. How could a senior be starved to death in this country? This is Canada. She further noted, “I think we need to search our conscience if the lives of the elderly are not worth a formal government bill and real change with teeth.”
As we vote on the bill before us, which hopefully people will support because it is a small change in the right direction, I hope we all think about our commitment to the people who built this country. Those people are increasingly vulnerable as they age. Think about the hard-working families who are doing everything they can to support that loved one. Think about the fact that we still do not have legislation that has teeth so that we can make sure to support seniors as they age.
In closing, as a person who represents a rural and remote community, we also have to recognize that those in small communities often see their loved ones go far away to get long-term care. They have to travel a great distance, which means they cannot be with them. Let us all fight to make sure that wherever one's loved is, they are safe.
1470 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/17/23 11:28:53 a.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, all Canadians deserve to retire and live with dignity, but the Liberals' underfunding has left seniors struggling to make ends meet. Seniors are telling me they cannot pay rent and they cannot afford groceries. They are terrified that they will be living on the streets.
The Liberals' failure to support seniors is making them feel alone and like no one cares. Will the government increase the guaranteed income supplement and give seniors some hope?
76 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/15/23 2:51:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, seniors built this country and they deserve dignity, but soaring food and housing costs are leaving so many behind. Under the government, seniors are struggling to keep up with the basic everyday costs, but the Liberals honestly do not seem to care.
The government has failed to raise the OAS for people under 75, so will it raise the guaranteed income supplement in this budget to lift all seniors out of poverty?
74 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/7/23 3:13:27 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, too many seniors in Canada are in serious poverty. Last week, I moved a motion to apply equal OAS payments to all seniors, regardless of age. Sadly, the government voted against it.
My office was contacted by a senior who is now making a human rights complaint against Service Canada. Why? It is because this government is participating in discrimination based on age.
When will the minister finally admit that she is allowing some seniors to fall below the poverty line and lifting others? She needs to do it. It is time.
94 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/2/23 2:47:46 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, seniors across the country are struggling with the rising cost of living. There is a bar of dignity that we should all expect in Canada, and far too many of our parents and grandparents are living below it.
Yesterday, the government denied my motion to get more financial help to all seniors, regardless of age. All seniors have to pay for food, rent and medication. They deserve dignity. Why does the Minister of Seniors not agree?
78 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/1/23 3:16:36 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order.
There have been consultations, and I hope that if you seek it, you will find consent for the following motion: That, given that all elderly Canadians face the same rising cost of living and greedflation, the recent 10% increase to the old age security be applied to all qualifying seniors regardless of age.
62 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Dec/7/22 3:58:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, today I am tabling a petition from seniors across Canada who have identified very clearly that single seniors have a much harder time financially and that we need to see significant changes by the government to support them. They note that senior couples can split their pension income, thereby allowing them to pay less tax and qualify for key things like old age security. That is not available for seniors who are single.
The petitioners note that the cost of living for a single person is two-thirds of the cost of living for a couple; that single-person households are continuing to grow and are the fastest-growing population in Canada, according to Statistics Canada; that of the six million seniors in Canada, over one-third are single, many of them women; and that this demographic will continue to grow.
This group is asking for justice on this issue and I hope they see it.
158 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I thank the member for bringing up how much dignity we need to bring to the discussion around indigenous women and girls and LGBT people being lost, murdered and missing. I appreciate that.
As for the other component of the question, I do agree that a senior who is 65 has every right to have a little extra in their old age security and should not have to wait until they are 75.
75 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Mr. Speaker, I am very honoured every day to stand up in the House. Today, we are talking about the fall economic statement. Before I talk about that, I just want to take a moment at the beginning of my speech to recognize that the bodies of indigenous women have been found in Winnipeg and an alleged Winnipeg serial killer has been identified.
I think collectively in the House, and hopefully across all of Canada, we are sitting with the deep horror of that reality and what that means for all of us. It is shameful that we live in a country that still does not value indigenous women and girls and our LGBT community. We see it demonstrated repeatedly. I hope all of us are carrying this in our hearts and that we continue to carry it in our hearts and our minds every day until this stops.
Coming back to the fall economic statement, I want to talk about some of the concerns I have around this economic statement. We are all hearing from constituents who are struggling every day to afford the basic necessities in their lives. We hear about the increasing use of food banks. We also hear from so many families who are eating substantially less. Parents are acting like good parents and are not eating as much so their children can go to bed with full bellies. That is something that we should all be listening to.
We know that inflation is certainly a part of the problem. However, we also know that greed is a huge part of the problem as well. In my community, I hear from a lot of indigenous elders and they consistently tell me that greed is an illness. They have a lot of traditional ways of dealing with greed, because it is seen as a sickness that will hurt our communities at large. I wish that, in this place, we could also see it as a sickness that needs moderation. It needs systems in place to stop it.
We know that Loblaws has seen record profits. It is profit like it has not seen in well over five years. It is profit that is so substantial that we hear it is making $1 million extra a day. That concerns me greatly. As we are having this discussion, it is important that we recognize that this fall economic statement does not really substantively address that issue and I hope that it will soon.
We know that the Canadians for Tax Fairness have said that the costs from inflation are more than what is passed on to consumers. That means that inflation is passed on to consumers but more is added. In my opinion, that is simply greed. We need to address that issue so that we hold the people who sell us our food accountable.
I remember a constituent once told me, “Rachel, we are not consumers; we are Canadians.” Every day when I am in the House, I really try to remind myself of that as we look at our systems and recognize some of the challenges in them.
I also did not see a substantial enough increase for housing. I know that on November 25 in my riding in Campbell River, there was a conversation on housing. Many representatives from communities throughout my region were participating. I heard again and again, like I do so often, that housing is simply a crisis. If someone has a fixed income or a low income, it is getting harder to find a place to live. A lot of people are living outside. There is a lot of snow in my area, which is fairly rare, but it is having a huge impact.
We also know that a lot of seniors are couch surfing. When I get calls from people in their eighties who are moving from friend's house to friend's house and sleeping on couches, it just means there is something substantively wrong in this country. I want to remind Canadians that the federal government really has not been part of the housing strategy in this country since 1992. I appreciate that the government has put some money into it, but if we leave a wound festering like that for so long, it is really hard to fix it. That is what we are seeing here.
I want to thank the Campbell River Community Foundation and the Campbell River and District Coalition to End Homelessness for all of their work on this particular file. We heard from small communities and indigenous communities. They are left out. The federal funding is not working. Indigenous communities are not getting the supports they need from the government and it needs to be better.
I also have concerns that we are not talking about GST on home heating. We know that this would help. It is not the biggest help, but put together with a lot of things, it would help hard-working people across this country be able to pay for their heat when we hit the cold season.
We still have not seen a meaningful windfall tax. That is such a gap. We need to have more structures in place. Again we will hear from the government on this, but it has not fixed the problem. It has done a few tweaks, but it has not taken that comprehensive look at the fact that people are making a lot of profit off the labour of Canadians and they are not paying their fair share. Ultrawealthy people are hiring accountants who can help them pay very little, but everyday people are paying all of their taxes. That is wrong and we have to fix it.
There are a few things that I am very much in support of in this bill as well. I was excited to read about the Canada recovery dividend. This is something that the NDP has been asking for. It is temporary and maybe we do not want temporary, but it is there. It is a one-time tax of 15% of taxable income over $1 billion, so it is getting at some of those profits. The other thing we know is that in this country a lot of corporations, after the pandemic, have done extremely well very quickly. In fact, many of them are making more profit than before the pandemic. We need to question that, we need to understand it and we need to make sure that they pay their fair share.
This dividend would also increase corporate income tax on banks and life insurance groups by 1.5%. That is getting some of that windfall tax and putting it back into the coffers. It is making sure that people in our communities get things like appropriate housing, dental care and a bit of support to help with their rent when they pay way more than 30% of their income on rent.
Those things will make a difference, but we also know that the Parliamentary Budget Officer has been very clear that if this Canada recovery dividend were put on big box stores and the oil and gas sector, we would see an increase of revenue to Canada of about $4.3 billion. We need to question this. Again, I keep coming back to this and the NDP will continue to keep coming back. When we see groups of people and big corporations making significant profits when other people cannot even feed their families and other people are living on the streets, Canada has an obligation to address this issue. Therefore, these are some steps in the right direction, but we still need to see more.
There is another thing that I am in support of and I am looking forward to seeing finally implemented. I know the NDP has been fighting and talking about this for many years. It is the removal of the federal portion of interest on student loans. We spend a lot of time in the House talking about young people and about the fact that they do not have enough to buy a house and that they are struggling, sometimes with several jobs in a very changing economy, to address the needs that they have and to have a future that they can believe in.
This is one step. It is not the only step that should be taken on behalf of young people. The federal government has to do more, but it is something that really would support a lot of young people and allow them not to have that burden. They go to school so that they can contribute to their community and to their country. If they have to spend all of their time trying to find a way to pay off their loans, then they do not get to do the things that will make all of us as Canadians a lot more substantive and healthy.
In closing, I want to say that I will be supporting this bill. I believe fundamentally in the fact that people need dental care, and I am really excited to see that come out the door. We know that we still have work. I am really excited to see next year that seniors finally get dental care. I do not know about the rest of the MPs in this place, but I have had a lot of seniors come to my door and talk about the fact that they cannot afford basic dental care and what the impact of that is in terms of their health and well-being.
I look forward to answering any questions.
1608 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very happy to be here to speak to Bill C-235, an act respecting the building of a green economy in the Prairies. I want to thank the member for Winnipeg South Centre for bringing this forward.
As a person who lives on the coast, I do not have the experience of living in the prairie region. However, I do connect to this very important issue, because I live and have grown up in more rural and remote communities. I recognize that when one lives in those environments, there is a very different way of being in the world.
We are a lot more connected to our communities. We often have a harder time getting to other places. I really appreciated the member talking about flying places and then having to wait many hours. I know when I come here, often I get to fly to one part of the country and then wait a few hours before I can get to this part of the country.
That is just the reality that we experience. It is something we all know we need to do better, especially when we are thinking about how we are going to make sure those spaces are more accessible. We think about making sure they are part of our communities across the planet and across this country, and they have an economic viability. That can sometimes be a challenge for more rural and remote communities.
This bill talks a lot about how to bring people together to talk about how we can see more of a green economy. It is something I really believe in. When we stand in a place like this, where we collectively represent the whole country, the stories from each region are unique, yet there is a common ground, especially when we talk about rural and remote communities.
We know they often go through a cycle of boom and bust. One moment it is going well, the economy is strong and people are doing well, but then it changes quickly. It is these communities that have built this country. Their resources and people have given so much in taxes and resources to this country, and often a lot of urban centres are built on the labour of more rural and remote communities. They are not included in a way that is meaningful.
In the last Parliament, I was happy to table Motion No. 53 on the principles for a sustainable and equitable future. It talked specifically about having solutions locally that looked at what the resources were, what our skill set was and how we were going to make ourselves more sustainable in rural communities. Then we can have a more stable economy but also address the issue of climate change, because we are in an emergency and things are changing very rapidly.
I can argue at a later date about what I think the government is doing, because I have to say, quite frankly, it is not moving in the direction I would like to see it move. We are pushing really hard to get some of those actions. When it comes to emissions and addressing climate change, we have a lot more proactive work to do.
Part of that conversation has to be looking at these communities in the Prairies, looking at rural and remote parts of Canada and asking what is sustainable in those communities. What are the skill sets in those communities? How do we bring people together? That is what this bill is about. How do we bring all those different voices together to make sure there are meaningful solutions going forward?
In my last job, I worked with newcomers to Canada. One of the things I found interesting was the amount of research that has happened in Canada and across the whole planet on how to create the best solutions. It is said again and again that with more diversity at the table and with more people with different opinions at the table, it can actually be worked through. It takes longer. There is no doubt.
When we are trying to figure out how to get from one place to another, and we have a lot of people around a table with differing opinions, it is going to take longer to get to that. The research has proven repeatedly that once we get there, even though it takes longer, the other side of that is a lot more coordinated, the solutions are a lot more innovative and they are long-lasting.
It is something we should be looking at and addressing, and that is what my motion talked about. How do we bring people together? How do we have a regional approach? When we look at what is happening in our environment, when we look at the challenges and concerns around stable employment, how do we not fight against each other? We need to come together and create solutions that are going to make sense and make sure there are good jobs in our region, but also address the climate crisis in a meaningful way.
We have to do that work. We have to do it with an urgency, so I appreciated the member talking about making that timeline shorter.
In his speech, the member said that the pace of change is too slow. I agree. When we are looking at the challenges that we are facing today, we cannot wait. We cannot sit here in this place and have big discussions. We need to give resources to local regions and communities and say to them that they are the experts in their area, that they tell us the criteria and the next steps they are going to take.
The NDP will be supporting this because I think it is important to look at those solutions, to look at local responses and to look at regional responses. They can profoundly make a difference.
When I look at my area, a lot of things are being ripped out of the earth, in one way or another. They are being shipped off to somewhere else, often outside of the country, to be changed into something, which is sent back to us and then we buy it. I am really concerned about that.
When I think about local solutions and when I look at the environmental crisis that we are in, we need to see more value-added production in our communities and in our regions. This is something that I think the bill will touch on. I hope that every person in this place will take it under consideration. If we do not start seeing more production with our own resources in our own country, we are going to continue to see wealth being here for a short time but it will not stay here permanently.
Last Friday, I was in Campbell River. A lot of people came together to talk about the housing crisis we are experiencing right now. Of course, inside of that issue, like every issue across the country, the climate crisis was brought up, how people without homes are having to live on the streets and what that means when we are having incredibly unpredictable weather and how we deal with these issues. We also talked about the vulnerability of seniors who live in our region. Our region usually does not get very hot but we are seeing this huge increase in heat, and then, during the winter, there is the very high cost of energy for people to stay warm and what that means for folks.
I think of Cortes Island, a small community in my riding, which is two ferry rides away from where I live. That community is working together. They are actually fundraising, as they have a high level of poverty in their senior population, so that they can all have heat pumps. The community itself is recognizing this huge challenge and they are collectively working together to deal with the climate crisis and also honour and respect the seniors in their communities by trying to find a solution.
In closing, we have to recognize the dynamic approach of our smaller communities. We have to work with them so that they have more opportunities. We have to understand that while the federal government has a very important role, sometimes its important role is to make sure that the resources are there so that the local communities can do the work that needs to be done.
I cannot say enough about that. When I look at economic development and when I look at addressing the climate crisis, we need to see those communities recognized, honoured and listened to. Sometimes bringing them together is really going to make a long-term difference, so that we can get to a solution that we can sustain.
1477 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Oct/3/22 2:16:43 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I rise to mark National Seniors Day, a day to celebrate the achievements of older adults and to give thanks for their contributions to society. They are a source of strength, history and support for their loved ones and communities.
I want to give thanks to the retirees who stepped up and joined the workforce during the pandemic to help us get through very difficult times. I promise to continue fighting to raise the bar of dignity for seniors who struggle to make ends meet.
Canada needs a national seniors strategy to ensure that all older adults can live independent, healthy, vibrant lives with access to safe, affordable housing in urban and rural communities, as well as having the financial ability to meet their essential needs. We must address and fix the long-term care crisis in this country so that all seniors can age with dignity.
Today I encourage everyone to think of an elder person who has significantly impacted their lives and thank them for it.
170 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Apr/25/22 2:30:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the government admitted its mistake with the GIS clawback and paid seniors back, but the one-time payment had a date restriction. Now, hundreds of seniors across this country are left out in the cold.
I wrote to the minister last week about this urgent concern. The Liberals must fix this. It is leaving seniors poor in our country. When will the current government stand up for seniors and start treating them all with dignity and respect?
79 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/29/22 6:23:37 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, I thank you, as always, for acknowledging me here so that I can do my work in the House.
We are here today to talk about a motion that commits to another study. When we look at the reality of seniors across this country, what we know is that the bar of dignity for so many seniors has been lowered yet again. I always use the bar of dignity as my reference point, because I fundamentally believe that all Canadians should be treated with dignity. They should be able to feel that they can take care of themselves, and that when they go out and need essential things, they can get those things.
I agree with the motion before us. I think it is important that seniors be treated with dignity, that they not be overwhelmed with financial worry, and that they not be worried about their retirement savings running out. I think it is important that seniors should be able to live independently in their homes. Those are all important things. However, I also believe that there are a lot of shelves in this place filled with reports about how that is true and what next steps we need to take to make that happen. Here we are: We have a non-binding motion that is going to maybe result in a study so that there is yet another report on a shelf somewhere talking about what seniors fundamentally need in our country. I just do not know how long seniors want to wait to have these things addressed.
Earlier today, I met with representatives from Single Seniors for Tax Fairness. I really appreciated my time spent with them, talking about how the realities of our system benefit seniors who are married or in relationships, and that there is this huge, growing gap for our single seniors who have to look after themselves on their own. These are largely women who maybe worked at great jobs where they had a great income or had worked jobs that were low-income. To me, both of those are incredibly valuable and should be honoured and respected, but at the end of the day, they are the exact stakeholder group that is worried about whether they are going to be able to live with dignity for the last years of their lives and whether they are going to be able to pay for the essential things that they need.
I remember, several years ago, that we did a pretty substantive study on a national seniors strategy. I still think it is unbelievable that we do not have a framework in this country that says, “Hey, we have a large population of people who are aging, and because of that we should probably have a plan federally about how we are going to work with that and how we are going to work with provinces and territories in a meaningful way to make sure that none of the seniors across this country gets left behind.”
Unfortunately, COVID showed us that seniors are being left behind. We saw it again and again in horrific ways. This was not something that should have surprised Canadians. We have been hearing from these folks, and from groups that advocate for them, that we do not have the proper infrastructure in this country. When it comes to care facilities, we do not have the systems in place that really focus on making sure that people are cared for in a respectful way. We got to see it in the most horrific ways, and I do not think that this study or this report on a shelf would make a difference.
I am really torn. Do I think it would be good to have more information about what we need to do better? Maybe, but what I am really interested in is something that is actually going to make the action happen: something that is going to look at the reality that people are living longer and that their retirement savings have to last substantively longer, and something that is going to look at how money can be moved around and at what age one has to move over to a RIF. Those are important things to talk about. However, I also know that a lot of that work has been done.
We need solutions and not studies. I really mean that, because I have talked to so many seniors across this country and in my own riding. Seniors have talked to me about the fact that they have to cut their medication in half, especially in the early months of the year when they have not paid the amount that means they get free medication. Seniors are putting their health at risk for the first few months, because they cannot afford to pay what they need to pay to get the medication they need.
When we look at housing, the reality is that affordable housing that is safe for seniors is getting harder and harder to find. We just saw, with the GIS clawback, a lot of seniors lose up to 100% of their GIS.
How many of those seniors actually lost their affordable housing? They are going to get that extra money, which is okay, but they are living in a place that is far more expensive than they were before and they simply do not have the money to make ends meet.
When we look at these solutions, they have to make sense for seniors. Doing another study is making a promise that we will do a study and maybe the government will do something about it this time. I am not persuaded that I will support this. I hear that everybody else looks at this and thinks this is a nice study, let us do that and no harm done, but is there harm done? How long do seniors have to wait? I am really torn on this.
I think that we need better plans. We need actions that are going to be taken. We need to make sure that there is support in place for people as they age so that they can have dignity. I think of my own mother, who is in a long-term care facility. She was a young senior and had a massive stroke. Her whole life changed in a day and our whole family had to change to accommodate that. I see her all the time. She has a decent pension. She was a nurse most of her life and has provided services to the communities that she served. She struggles to make ends meet.
This is assisted living. If she has a bad month, which means she cannot go downstairs and eat the food they provide for her, she has to pay a lot of extra money to have it come up to her. She does not have that money. It gets harder and harder.
I also think about the fact that seniors are starting to lose their well-being because they cannot afford to make ends meet. It impacts one's health, if one cannot afford to make ends meet. We look at the spectrum of seniors as they age. We know that some are doing very well. We know that some are really struggling. We know there are a lot in the middle who sometimes have a good year and sometimes have a very bad year.
There are a lot of solutions that could be provided that would really make some meaningful changes. I think of a bill that I brought to the House that talked about seniors who receive the guaranteed income supplement every year. We know that between 20,000 to 30,000 seniors every year lose their GIS for up to three or four months. Why do they lose it? They lose it because they do not get their taxes in on time. Do they get their taxes on time? Absolutely, they do, every year. However, for many reasons, such as their health, that they are caring for a loved one and they are elderly or the onset of dementia, they do not get their taxes in on time and that means on July 1, they lose their GIS for up to four months.
It was a simple bill that said let us just make sure that every senior across the country who receives the guaranteed income supplement gets a year of grace to get their taxes in so that no senior has to go through months without that extra bit.
I will never forget, my first summer as a member of Parliament, getting that call from a lovely woman who was 84 years old who had lost her GIS. The government said, yes, it was going to get that in place as soon as possible, but her landlord said that, since she could not pay the rent, she had to get out. She was 84 years old. Where she was going to go? We worked really hard to make sure that did not happen, but it does not seem right.
I want to see a bill that is actually going to take action, that is going to make sure that seniors are at the very core of it and that we do not just have another report on a shelf somewhere telling us what we should do while seniors suffer across the country.
I regret to say that I am not sure I will be supporting this, and that the NDP is not sure it will be supporting this. How many reports do we need on a shelf, when we urgently need substantive action for seniors across the country now?
1623 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/29/22 6:03:39 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, that was a thoughtful speech. I have worked with the hon. member previously and really enjoyed the work that I have been able to do with her.
However, I have to follow along with my colleagues on this side of the House. The reality is that this is a non-binding motion that may or may not provide some sort of report. We have a lot of reports. I can think of several years ago when I was first elected. We did a great study on a national seniors strategy, where we had a lot of clear recommendations about what we needed to do next to see seniors prosper.
I am just wondering why another study instead of something that is actually going to get us into the implementation. Why should seniors continue to wait?
137 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/21/22 4:25:13 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I will be sharing my time today with the amazing member for Cowichan—Malahat—Langford.
We are here today to talk about an NDP motion that really addresses the key issue of where the bar of dignity is in this country we all belong to. What we are seeing across this country is more and more people falling below it. Members may ask what I mean by the bar of dignity. To me, it means that one has the ability to look after themselves, to have a roof over their head, to be able to feed themselves, to be able to afford the medication they need and to be able to access those basic things that we all deserve to be a part of because we are all Canadians and because we live in a wealthy country that should be looking after all the people who live in it. Right now, we are in another government, another federal government, which passes hands between the Liberals and Conservatives, that continues to take that bar of dignity and lower it and lower it.
We have heard from some of our Liberal friends here today that there are some great economic outcomes. There are more jobs and there are more opportunities. However, when we talk to everyday people who are living through that experience right now, what we see very clearly is that a lot of those folks are working three or four of those jobs trying to make ends meet. We are talking about families who do not get to spend time together as a family because both working parents have to juggle all of those factors. We need to look at this in what we are seeing people do and see where their needs are.
I cannot help but touch on housing. In my riding of North Island—Powell River, we have seen a huge increase in the cost of living. That is largely based around a housing market that has exploded. Parts of my riding, some of the most rural and remote communities, have seen the cost of housing go up between 60% and 80%. That means that people who are living within those communities cannot afford to purchase within their own community.
It has also had a huge impact on people who were renting homes. With the market exploding this way, we are seeing a lot of people who own houses that they usually rent out are selling those houses because they are making a lot of money in doing so. This means more and more people are unhoused.
Just the other day, we had a gentleman walk into our office. My staff were quick to tell me when I came back. It was a gentleman who lives on disability. He has been living in his apartment for many, many years and has just been told that he has to leave because a new person bought the home that has the rental unit he lives in. His reality, and it is the truth because I have heard it from so many people across my riding, is there is nowhere else for him to go. There is no affordable unit for him.
When I hear that the government is giving money to private corporations that are charging rents that are 30% to 120% higher than the market rate, it just tells us this is not a project or program that the government is taking seriously. It is not about making sure the people who are unhoused, who are struggling, who do not know how they are going to live from day to day are going to be able to have an affordable home to live in. It is about priorities, and that is what this motion is about in this House. It is about saying that the people who work hard every day deserve to be treated with dignity.
I think about these challenges. I have talked to a lot of professionals who have lost their rental units simply because they have been sold from underneath them. They are now living in trailers hoping that trailer parks will not just stay open during the normal summer, spring and fall months, but that they will stay open the whole year, just so they have somewhere safe to live.
I also think about the many seniors who had the GIS clawed back. They were contacting our office. They are very grateful they are seeing those dollars come back to them, but in a lot of cases, they have already lost their home and have already lost where they live. Now, because the cost of living is going up so much and because the cost of rentals are going up so much, they have nowhere to live.
Just the other day I was at Kwesa Place, which is a place in Campbell River that provides showers and laundry facilities for those who are unhoused. When I was there, I met a lot of folks who are just struggling to get by, who are really challenged for multiple reasons.
One of the things that was most startling to me was that inside that space they have a project they are working on. They are building wooden structures that people would be able to pull, either on their own or with a bike, that they can live in, because there is nowhere else for them to live.
I really respect solutions. I really respect when communities come together, look at some of these issues and create solutions, but this tells me we are still not seeing a federal government that sees the right to housing as a basic human right. The government is saying that it is okay for people to scrounge around to make a few thousand dollars and build a wooden box to live in, so they do not get cold in a rainstorm.
As such, I appreciate what Kwesa Place is doing. I really appreciate the warmth it brings and how it helps people be able to wash their laundry, but I want the bar of dignity in this country to be higher. That is what this motion is about.
I have also had some conversation with food banks in my riding. We have talked about the huge numbers of people who are coming through and continue to come through. They are people who have never had to use the food bank before. People who are working hard every day and making a decent income are having to come to the food banks because they cannot afford not to. Why is the government continuing to allow the bar of dignity for Canadians to go so far down?
What I find the most frustrating is that often in these big moments of discussion about how to make the world a better place, I see people fighting one another and people mad because one group of people has one right and another group of people has another right. I think it is important for all of us, as Canadians, to come together and ask what the real issue is here. The real issue here is that wealth is being held by very few in this country, and every year we are seeing their piece of the pie grow larger and everybody else's grow smaller, so I really encourage Canadians to stop fighting about their small piece of the pie and other people's small pieces of the pie.
Let us start talking about what really needs to happen, which is leadership from the federal government to say that, if someone is going to make enormous profits, they need to step up and pay their fair share. I can tell members that the people in my riding, whether they work in the fishing industry, the logging industry, or in education or tourism, are paying their fair share every single day. They care about their communities every single day, but there are those in this country who are not paying their fair share.
I just want to let my constituents know that in 2021, Scotiabank had a net profit of over $10 billion. It paid $4.3 billion of those billions of dollars in dividends to the shareholders, and at the same time it increased its customers' banking fees. Then we saw that BMO made a net profit of $7.7 billion and paid out over $2.7 billion in dividends, while increasing the fees for its customers' bank accounts.
We can look at Loblaws, owned by the very wealthy Weston family, which made a net profit of $1.9 billion. They paid $484 million in dividends to their shareholders. However, they refused to increase the wages of their workers. They refused to supplement those frontline workers who have been working on the front line during this pandemic and who continue to work on the front line. They are at higher risk of contracting COVID-19.
Really, today we are here to talk about fairness, to take up that space and make this country a little fairer. Let us look at this motion. It would direct the Liberals to fulfill their campaign promise. This is perhaps a bit of a new thing for them, but something I am really hopeful they will follow through with. They said they would implement a 3% surtax on banks and insurance companies with net profits over $1 billion.
We also want to see it extended to oil companies and large grocery chains with net profits over $1 billion because it is time for a government in this country to finally stand up, stop protecting excess corporate profits and start saying the bar of dignity in this country needs to be higher.
We should not have seniors at the bottom grovelling for the things they need, when they built this country. We should not be asking families to put groceries back on the shelves because they cannot afford them. Hopefully we will see some action on this.
1672 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Mar/3/22 2:48:30 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the cost of living is going through the roof, and yesterday the Bank of Canada raised interest rates. Paying rent, buying food and medicine is seriously concerning for seniors.
Some of the most vulnerable seniors have been anxiously waiting for months to get their GIS paid back. The government is doing the bare minimum to help people get by, and time is running out to fix the government's GIS mess. Will seniors be left out in the cold again because the Liberal government could not fix the problems it created?
93 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I am very happy to be here today to speak on this really important issue, especially for the many seniors across our country who are relying on us to get this piece of legislation passed.
I will be sharing my time with the amazing member for Nunavut, who has some very important things to share with us about the region she represents and how unique those experiences are for seniors.
I also want to take this opportunity to recognize that over 50 more children's bodies have been found outside of a residential institution. All of us sit in this place, a place that created all of the framework for what happened and continues to happen to indigenous communities, and I hope we are all listening. For every single child we hear about and for every community that is talking about what happened and are sharing these stories, I hope we are all listening and carrying those stories and communities with us. I would like to express my sincerest condolences to those communities and let them know I will be thinking of them during this very painful time. I continue to think of all the communities that are in the process of still looking for children who have been lost and are still waiting for them to be recovered, and of course I recognize all of those who have been found.
We are here tonight to talk about seniors and the fact the government made a colossal mistake that really impacted seniors profoundly. Working seniors did what every other Canadian did. They lost their jobs because of the pandemic and they applied for pandemic benefits to help tide them over during this very difficult time.
As we have these discussions, I hope we recognize seniors across this country, the most vulnerable of them, the ones who are receiving the guaranteed income supplement, are hitting a crisis point. Even with this payment that I am very grateful to see happen, it is far too late. July of last year was when these seniors lost their GIS, some partially and some completely. During that time, they have not only lost this amount of money but lost the provincial benefits that are automatically given to them because they qualify for the guaranteed income supplement.
I talked about those people in the House of Commons repeatedly, because it is important all of us as legislators understand the impacts we have when we make decisions, the impacts the government creates when it makes decisions without really looking at the ramifications, especially for those of us who are challenged the most.
Even with this money coming sooner than we expected and opening up stores so Service Canada can work with members to identify the seniors who are the most vulnerable and get them the money even sooner, we know they have lost so much during that time. I think of the many seniors who lost their homes. They lost the places where they lived and are now put in a bad situation. We all know in this place, because we are hearing in all our communities and constituencies, that the cost of living is going up dramatically. The cost of housing is one of the most profoundly expensive costs we have.
When we look at some of these low-income seniors, they lost their housing when they lost their GIS. They lost the stable housing they could afford and are now living in vehicles or in someone's basement. They are living an experience they hoped they would never have to. Something I will also think about when I remember this time is how many seniors said they never thought they would be in this position in their eighties.
Here they are now and they are finally getting a one-time payment. They are going to be retroactively paid, and then into the future we are being promised by the government that there will be no more cutbacks, that they will return to their normal GIS and that things should continue. However, they have already lost so much, and now they are having to pay a lot higher rates for their rent. In some cases, they have lost their health because they have not been able to afford their medication.
I do not know about the other members in the House, but as the senior spokesperson for the NDP, I am hearing not only from my constituency but from seniors across Canada who are writing to ask if they will be punished again in the next tax season. They are asking me if this is really going to be over and if I can promise them this is going to be over.
I really hope that the minister thinks about that as this rolls out and that we make sure that seniors across this country are educated so they know that things should get better. More than anything I hope that of course this place will make sure that this does not happen again.
It does really outline something that I believe this place has to take more consideration of and that is the growing poverty across our country. Persons living with disabilities and seniors are some of the poorest people across our country. We need to look into that and figure out how we can do much better. All of us have been shaken by this. When we recognize that, for single seniors, the GIS tops them up to just over $19,000 a year and if they are in a partnership just over $25,000 a year, most of us cannot imagine, especially with the cost of everything increasing, living on that low income.
I hope and have encouraged the minister to start talking meaningfully about a guaranteed basic livable income. We need to have this conversation. As we see the world changing and see automation increasing, we need to see the bar of dignity extended and not dismissed as it has been.
We also have to have big conversations about how long seniors are working, some by choice and some because they do not have a choice, and make sure that the tax system works for them. We know a lot of seniors are working into their mid-seventies and when they hit a certain point in their seventies, they are no longer able to pay into the Canadian pension plan. That can be a big deterrent for people who have good health and want to keep working.
I also want to talk about the guaranteed income supplement and one of the big faults that it has. Every year between 20,000 to 30,000 seniors in July lose their guaranteed income supplement. They lose it in part because they filed their taxes a little too late, because somebody they loved was ill, because they themselves were ill, and sometimes because they are having an onset of dementia. There are multiple reasons that happens.
I have asked the minister to consider a bill I presented that would look at making sure that every senior who received the guaranteed income supplement had a one-year amnesty. If they got their taxes in a little late, they would not be worried about being able to pay their rent in July.
When I was first elected, I had a call from a senior who was 84 years old, telling me that she got her taxes in a little late because she was sick with the flu during tax time. She had lost her GIS and did not know when it was coming and was going to be evicted from her apartment. I do not think anyone in the House wants to see an 84-year-old evicted simply because she was ill.
My bill would look at creating a space for people to be secure in their income, for those like this amazing senior who was so brave to reach out. For seniors to have to humble themselves, who have worked hard their whole lives, the vast majority of seniors receiving GIS are single women or the working poor. That is who they are. They have worked hard all of their lives. They do not want to ask for handouts. They want to look after themselves, so this has been really hard. We were able to work with the senior, her landlord and with the CRA to make sure that she got her money quickly and assured the landlord she would be able to pay her rent, if a little late.
I hope as we go through this experience all of us remember it is our job here as legislators to make sure that the most vulnerable in our country are cared for. When we look at the processes that we are putting into place, we need to think first of those who need us to think of them and not think of those who have so much that they can fill in those gaps when they need to.
It has been said to me many times that we know who we are by how the people who are the most vulnerable in our communities are doing. Canada must do better. We have seen this example for seniors. Let us make sure that we no longer punish the poor for simply doing the hardest work they can to look after themselves.
1567 words
All Topics
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/14/22 3:08:17 p.m.
- Watch
Mr. Speaker, the Liberal government made a huge mistake when it cut some of the most vulnerable seniors off the GIS, which they rely on to purchase basic things like housing, medication and food. They feel hopeless and they feel abandoned. The New Democrats have been asking the government since before the last election to fix this problem. Finally the minister announced a one-time payment, but it is not until May.
Seniors are in desperate need now to stave off hunger and eviction, so again I am asking this: Will the minister support seniors at risk and immediately release emergency funds?
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
