Since the federal government already spends more money on retirement income security than any other budget line, there’s no reason why any senior in Canada should live in poverty. The fact that half a million still do is a problem we need to fix.

The good news is that a solution is well within our reach – and it doesn’t even require any additional contributions from taxpayers. So it’s surprising and disappointing that no party is making the elimination of seniors’ poverty a goal this election.

The solution lies in dealing with the reality that we no longer spend OAS funds wisely.

In the midst of an affordability crisis, OAS sends an $18,000 annual subsidy to retired couples with household incomes that reach $180,000 – and does so using borrowed money. By contrast, families raising kids start losing the Canada Child Benefit (CCB) when their household income surpasses $79,000.

Although the Auditor General recently exposed that OAS hasn’t been updated since its creation in 1952, no party is proposing to bring this program into the 21^st century.

The primary change that’s needed is to modernize the clawback threshold, bringing it more in line with the clawback for the CCB. Doing so would generate savings that could virtually eliminate seniors’ poverty, giving each poor senior an additional $5,000 every year. 

It’s surprising the no party has embraced this plan – or proposed another concrete way to make sure our seniors are able to live above the poverty line. The Liberals and Conservatives think they can dupe you by silently neglecting this issue - despite the top-of-mind concerns many voters share about rising living costs. The NDP take a different tack, heading down slogan central. They offer a vague pledge to “lift all seniors out of poverty” with little to back it up.

Here's a summary of the (unambitious) measures that the Conservatives, Liberals and NDP have promised for retirees.

Conservatives

Mr. Poilievre’s party focuses on helping those over 64 who are still in the labour market. The Conservatives would permit these seniors to shelter another $10,000 of earned income from taxation, a promise worth $1,300 per year. 

The announcement implies that party is concerned about working poor seniors, which is laudable. However, any senior who earns income in the labour market could make use of their proposed fix – regardless of need. Some working seniors will be affluent individuals who continue to work because they choose to, not out of economic need. It’s unclear that extending a tax shelter for the former group is a good use of scare taxpayer funds, especially at a time when many people are facing real affordability pressures.

The Conservatives will also provide retirees more flexibility to shelter from taxes the income they previously saved in an RRSP. Mr. Poilievre’s plan would let them shelter that income for another two years beyond the current policy.

These two measures will cost another $8 billion over the next four years. This comes on top of the $28 billion increase already projected for OAS in the 2024 federal budget -- the largest increase of any federal program.  Despite all this new spending, the Conservative platform offers no credible plan to eliminate seniors' poverty.

Liberals

For the next year, Mr. Carney’s party would offer an additional $652 to each low-income retiree who receive the Guaranteed Income Supplement. That’s just 13% of the $5000 we recommend to lift seniors out of poverty – and our proposal would deliver this additional support on an ongoing basis.

Like the Conservatives, the Liberals would give retirees more flexibility to shelter from taxes income previously saved in an RRSP. That’s what the party means when it promises to “reduce the minimum amount that must be withdrawn from a Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF).”

All told the Liberals promise to add $2 billion more for seniors on top of the large increases already planned for OAS. As with the other parties, the Liberals don't provide a credible plan to eliminate seniors' poverty.

NDP

Mr. Singh’s NDP promises to “lift all seniors out of poverty by raising the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS).” This is a worthy goal – so it’s disappointing that the commitment is made in just one line of a March 26^th party announcement.

In it's costed platform, the NDP would add $6 billion to GIS over the next four years. Its funding will not be enough in 2025, 2026 or 2027 to eliminate seniors poverty.  However, the $3.3 billion increase the NDP proposes for 2028 could be enough money to meet this goal. Ultimately, more information is required before we can say so with confidence. This underscores why all parties should be required to develop detailed, costed platforms voters can trust, and publish them early in campaigns.

There's also no indication that the NDP’s pledge to eliminate senior’s poverty would be realized by more fairly and efficiently spending existing OAS funds. So it appears that the party is content to leave the $18,000 subsidy in place for retired couples with incomes that reach $180,000.  For now, we award the NDP a "slogan central" grade for this policy area; but we note it is closer to the real deal than the Liberals and Conservatives.