CHRIS IN THE COMMONS: Challenging the government on the CPI error

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I want to take this rare opportunity to follow up on a question I asked the minister recently about an error admitted to by Statistics Canada in calculating the rate of inflation.

As members will recall, I have been raising this issue in the House on behalf of seniors since it first became public in August 2006. I would like to remind members of the House and people who may be watching us tonight on television what is at issue here.

Between July 2001 and March 2006, Statistics Canada underestimated the consumer price index by one-tenth of one percentage point in each of those five years. This means that recipients of the old age security, Canada pension plan and the guaranteed income supplement were shortchanged on their cost of living adjustments for a period of five years.

When the error was discovered, the correctly calculated CPI was implemented but it was not implemented retroactively. Rather, it was implemented effective mid-2006. Seniors were never reimbursed for the intervening five years and therein lies the rub.

When I raised this question on a previous occasion, the parliamentary secretary to the minister acknowledged the mistake but said that the government was obliged to act based on published CPI data, even if those published data were wrong. The member said:

The Department of Human Resources and Social Development is required by law to use the published CPI data in the indexation of the Canada pension plan and old age security benefits. Human Resources and Social Development Canada acted correctly and according to the law.

However, as I and, indeed, seniors and newspapers from around the country have been asking: Where does that leave the seniors who were underpaid for almost five years? Should they not get a retroactive payment? It was not their fault. It was not the fault of the government department concerned. It was Statistics Canada's fault but it does not have that amount of money to pay out.

The government has acknowledged the error and corrected the current rates but so far it has dodged the issue. In fact, the government has continued to dodge the issue in question period, in correspondence and in response to petitions that I have tabled in the House.

The former minister of human resources and social development dodged the issue. The parliamentary secretary to the minister dodged the issue. The Secretary of State for Seniors dodged the issue and the current Minister of Human Resources and Social Development has dodged the issue.

Instead, they all tried to avoid taking responsibility by talking about other issues that have impacted seniors.

Tonight let me put the question as simply as I can with no more opportunities for fudging. Will the government do the right thing and reimburse seniors for the money that is owed to them as a result of Statistics Canada's miscalculation of the CPI between 2001 and 2006, yes or no?

Mrs. Lynne Yelich (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Human Resources and Social Development, CPC):

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the hon. member for raising the question this evening. It allows me the opportunity to discuss all of the great things that this government has done for seniors in the past and over the past two years.

I know that the hon. member cares deeply about these issues and I want to assure her that this government does as well.

Unfortunately, under the watch of the previous Liberal government, Statistics Canada did make a small error in the calculation of the consumer price index. This is a tool that measures inflation and calculates pension benefits for seniors. Earlier this year, Statistics Canada corrected this error and the consumer price index continues to serve as Canada's best and most accurate tool to measure inflation.

Like all western countries, Canada does not retroactively adjust the consumer price index. Retroactive adjustments to the consumer price index would result in administrative chaos. It would affect private and public pension plans, labour force agreements and many other agreements that use the CPI.

We know that the members of the NDP do not have to worry about the long term effects of their words because they will never form the government. However, we must worry about these effects.

If my hon. friend and her colleagues will not take the word of the government on this issue, perhaps they would like to listen to the International Labour Organization which confirmed that long term ramifications of retroactively changing the CPI would have a devastating effect on countless social programs that Canadians rely on.

I am sure the member knows that when it comes to honouring the contributions that Canadian seniors have made to their communities, the economy and the country, no government in history has done a better job than the one under this Prime Minister. Seniors know that actions speak louder than words. This is why this government acted quickly to support seniors issues. It is why within months of being elected this government introduced Bill C-36 to strengthen the CPP and OAS programs for all seniors.

We have simplified the application process and changed the rules so that seniors do not have to apply year after year for the benefits that they deserve. These are changes which the previous Liberal government never made during its 13 years in power.

We have brought in two separate 3.5% increases to the GIS. These increases will raise the total GIS benefit by more than $2.7 billion over the next five years and will benefit more than 1.6 million guaranteed income supplement recipients, including more than 50,000 seniors who were not eligible for the program under the previous Liberal government.

This is a record of action of which this government is very proud.

Ms. Chris Charlton:

Mr. Speaker, I think at this point members will appreciate my frustration in trying to get a clear answer out of this government. I asked for a simple yes or no in response to a very straightforward question. Yes or no, will seniors be able to expect a refund cheque going back to 2001?

I would be happy to engage in a debate about how little the other initiatives mentioned by the parliamentary secretary will actually do for Canada's neediest seniors, and I have certainly done that on many other occasions in this House, but I do not want to allow the government to sidetrack us yet again from the issue at hand.

Let me be clear what is at stake. According to a briefing note prepared for the Secretary of State for Seniors that I received through an access to information request, the impact of the revision that I am asking about would be “billions of dollars in the public and private sectors”. With that much at stake, hard-working Canadians deserve a straightforward response. One more time, will seniors get what is owed to them retroactively going back from 2001 to 2006?

Mrs. Lynne Yelich:

Mr. Speaker, I did explain to the member exactly what we were doing with the retroactivity, but again, this will allow me to tell Canadians what this government is doing for seniors. We have an impressive record and one worth talking about.

Budget 2008 provides the latest example of this government's support for seniors across the country. We increased the guaranteed income supplement exemption to $3,500 from the previous Liberal level of $500. This will allow GIS recipients to keep more of their hard-earned money without any reduction to the benefits that they deserve. This is exactly what Canadian seniors have been asking for. It is something that this government has delivered, and it is something that that member and her party have voted against.

Budget 2008 also committed $13 million to fund projects that will raise awareness of elder abuse and ensure that those who built this country are not taken advantage of. Again, it is something that the member--