Skip to content

LETTER: Maple Ridge woman irked by federal seniors pension program

Only seniors 75 and older received an increase in their Old Age Pensions. A local resident would like to see struggling seniors 65 to 74 also receive the help
web1_210705-mrn-rh-lettermckenziedevelopment-john_1
Send your letter to the editor via email and include your first and last name, address, and phone number. Letters can also be submitted through our website.

Dear Editor,

The federal government has created a two-tiered system for Old Age Security recipients.
 
Two years ago the federal government gave seniors aged 75 and older a 10 per cent increase in their Old Age Security pension, which allegedly discriminates against seniors aged 65 to 74. The prior scenario has been a contentious issue, in the House of Commons, for some time. 
 
I thought the seniors of Maple Ridge ages 65 to 74 might like to know how the federal government is supposedly discriminating against them via section 15 (2) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. According to section 15 (2) of the charter it is, I believe, acceptable to violate the equal rights of seniors ages 65 to 74, as long as doing so improves conditions for disadvantaged groups of people, or disadvantaged individuals. The disadvantaged, according to section 15 (2) of the charter, includes people disadvantaged” because of race, national or ethic origin, colour, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability.”

In my opinion, not all seniors ages 65 and over qualify to receive the 10 per cent increase in their Old Age Security pension because they are not disadvantaged. But, I believe, disabled seniors qualify, because they are disadvantaged.
 
I sent an e-mail to Steven Mackinnon, federal minister of labour and seniors, because I wanted clarification concerning the fact that the federal government has created a two-tiered system for Old Age Security recipients. I received a reply from Kristen Underwood director general seniors and pensions policy secretariat Income Security and Social Development Branch Employment and Social Development Canada.

In the reply Underwood stated that “With increasing age, seniors tend to have lower incomes and often face higher health-related expenses because of the onset of illness or disability.” Moreover, disabled seniors ages 65 to 74  are disadvantaged and also experience lower incomes and higher health-related expenses, but the federal government seems to have abandoned them.
 
Unfortunately, I believe the only way the federal government is going to give disabled seniors ages 65 to 74 a 10 per cent increase in their Old Age Security is if one or more of them launches a constitutional challenge.  
 
Linda Meyer, Maple Ridge