They must have thought English speakers across the rest of Canada would never notice the slogan. On the podium sign at a Conservative campaign event in Quebec ahead of the upcoming federal Chicoutimi-Le Fjord byelection, it read: “Plus d’argent pour nos aînés.” More money for our seniors.
The same seniors who are currently, by far, Canada’s wealthiest demographic and also, by far, the federal budget’s single largest line item. Seniors benefits represent approximately one in five federal dollars spent each year, beating out spending on housing, national defense, and even health care.
The campaign sign may as well read, “more money for the rich.”
By nature, slogans are short, pointed, and will never convey the full context or depth of a party’s policy proposals. However, this wasn’t a case of bad comms or missing details. Rather, the details behind the sign are only more confounding and infuriating.
The CPC isn’t proposing to shift more spending to seniors living in poverty, who do need more support as cost-of-living continues to soar. They want to funnel more taxpayer dollars to all seniors, not based on need, and regardless of wealth. And they want to do it twice!
They both resurfaced an ill-advised 2025 election promise to remove federal income taxes for seniors on the first $34,000 they earn, and also now pledge to increase Old Age Security (OAS) for seniors ages 65 to 74.
To say this is a slap in the face to younger generations, who are by far bearing the brunt of the housing crisis, elevated inflation, historically high unemployment, and outdated tax brackets that treat today’s middle-class earners as though they were luxuriously wealthy, is a gross understatement.
How bleak is the economic situation for millennials and Gen Z? So bad that many feel they can’t afford to have the kids they would otherwise desperately want , a major driver behind Canada’s ultra-low fertility rate. The notion of taking more money from the nation’s young and transferring it to older generations should be so far outside the Overton window you can’t even glimpse its silhouette.
In fairness, the CPC proposal to increase the tax-free income threshold is actually a good idea — if they weren’t gatekeeping the change to seniors at the expense of struggling younger workers. But, instead of ensuring everyone keeps more of their paycheque, this policy instead uses younger workers’ tax dollars to subsidize tax cuts for seniors regardless of their wealth or income level.
Yet it’s their promise to boost OAS that’s the most egregious from just about every angle you examine it from — generational equity, class equity, and fiscal responsibility. OAS currently accounts for one in six federal dollars spent each year, totalling between $81 and $89 billion annually and is projected to surpass $100 billion annually by 2030.
OAS isn’t funded like a pension that’s invested through individual worker or employer contributions. It has no connection at all to employment history. Rather, it’s paid out using general tax revenues, transferring wealth from younger workers to older seniors, with laughable means testing that only begins for individuals at incomes of $90,997 a year. Couples aged 65 to 74 who earn up to $181,994 annually can receive full OAS payments, and couples over 75 who make up to $308,392 annually can do the same. Asset wealth plays no role.
In comparison, the Canada Childcare Benefit limits payments by using family income rather than individual income to calculate benefits, and additionally begins means testing once that income exceeds a mere $37,487 — ironically just above the income amount Conservatives would like to tax exempt for seniors.
At a bare minimum, eligibility for both programs should be standardized. However, just about every economist and policy expert under the sun agrees OAS needs to be clawed back for higher income earners, not inexplicably increased.
It’s not just about generational fairness. For every tax dollar taken from younger workers and gifted to seniors who are already financially comfortable, there are additional costs paid by the entire country when it comes to productivity, entrepreneurship, the population replacement rate, and overall economic growth, which by extension limits quality of life.
Moreover, we literally can’t afford the luxury. Canada’s federal and provincial debt is expected to hit $2.9 trillion by the end of this year. The federal government’s Spring Economic Update estimated the 2025-2026 fiscal year that recently ended at $67 billion. Spending beyond our means again burdening younger and future generations with paying off massive debts incurred today.
OAS is the biggest source of new federal spending growth behind ballooning deficits and debt. It isn’t the “good” type of debt either— it’s not an investment in needed infrastructure or economic opportunity. It’s purely discretionary spending, funneled to a cohort that largely doesn’t need it, against any reasonable definition of discretion.
Canada desperately needs bold tax and benefits reforms, but the ones presented by Conservatives this week have lost the plot so entirely the page may as well be blank.
National Post
