OAS Can Work Better - And So Many People Know It
Politicians, journalists, and community leaders from the left, right, and centre know it’s time for a better OAS design.
The Basic Income Canada Network (BICN) formally endorses Gen Squeeze’s plan to Fix OAS as a strategy to increase Canada’s national ambition to reduce poverty even in this difficult era of austerity.
BICN advances human-rights based public policy that ensures everyone has enough income to meet basic needs, live with dignity, and participate in society and the economy.
“[Prime Minister] Carney and the boomers can save Canada” by implementing Gen Squeeze’s plan to Fix OAS.
— Max Fawcett, National Observer Lead Columnist — How Mark Carney and the baby boomers can save Canada
“Among income security programs in Canada, OAS is unusual in the generosity it shows to wealthier families. The income at which benefits are reduced, coupled with a low reduction rate, means a couple with a combined income exceeding $300,000 could conceivably still receive a small OAS benefit. These funds would be better spent if they were redirected to seniors in greatest need.”
— Maytree Foundation – Seniors’ poverty in Canada: Why it exists and why it doesn’t have to
When the Conservatives formed government in 2012, Pierre Poilievre supported OAS reform. Just as Gen Squeeze has regularly observed, he argued that by the early 2030s:
“...the number of people on OAS will double, the cost will triple, and the number of taxpayers supporting each retiree will fall by half… We need to think of OAS as a glass of water. Retirees can only drink out of the cup in benefits what workers pour into it in taxes. If Canadians are drinking out of the cup faster than what is poured in, then someone goes thirsty.”
— Pierre Poilievre, Leader of the Conservative Party of Canada - House of Commons Hansard, May 7, 2012
A “more prudent” approach to dealing with the “peril of rising federal debt” would include “reworking of benefits to senior citizens, to focus income subsidies on those who are truly poor, not on households with incomes multiples higher than the national average.”
— Globe & Mail Editorial Board, October 5, 2025
"...no responsible fiscal plan is possible without reining in the costs of Old Age Security payments. Right now, OAS payments are sent to seniors whose retirement years are amply secure. A couple with an $181,000 household income would together receive annual payments of nearly $18,000, without benefits being clawed back. Taxing poorer, younger Canadians to cut cheques for wealthy retirees is nonsensical at the best of times, and incomprehensible when debt costs are surging.
— Globe & Mail Editorial Board, November 9, 2025
“While some programs such as the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) provide additional income support to low-income seniors, OAS provides support to many upper middle-income seniors… Increasing OAS payments will cost billions each year while supplementing the income of many seniors who aren’t in need.”
— Jake Fuss, Fraser Institute Director of Fiscal Studies
OAS benefit increases are “really bad policy… Meeting people’s needs, especially the elderly, that’s very important. But understand this is not targeted to those who need it. This is universal. It’s a bad idea. It’s too expensive.”
— John Manley, Former Liberal Finance Minister
“One of the principal problems with Old Age Security in its current form is that it does not address a targeted need… The problem is the program’s clawback thresholds are too high… If the government believes low-income seniors require more help than they currently receive, it should consider raising the threshold for [the GIS] or changing its clawback rates.”
“A married couple receiving OAS with no clawback with a household income of almost $200,000” … Yet younger Canadians, “even if they’re more trained and more educated, they’re into jobs that are a long long way from a combined household incomes of $200,000.” … “Seniors are very well looked after in Canada.”
— Rudyard Griffiths, Publisher of The Hub
"Ottawa’s increasing OAS spending dedicates scarce public resources on the by-and-large much more well-off older generations. Canadians aged 65 and older have a median net worth now above $1 million, compared to Canadians under 35 having a median net worth of only $48,000, according to research conducted by CEO of Ipsos Public Affairs Darrell Bricker. Missing Middle Initiative founding director and Hub contributor Mike Moffatt calculated that, on average, the income of men older than 65 now surpasses the average income of men aged 25 to 34, with seniors making more than $60,000."
— Graeme Gordon, The Hub
Ottawa should not increase OAS benefits because:
“We need to avoid worsening intergenerational frictions in Canada and to conserve needed fiscal room for spending on other priority areas... the public pillars of our current retirement income system provide robust income supports.”
— Colin Busby, Director of Policy Engagement at the C.D. Howe Institute
“Our social spending heavily favours older people at the expense of younger generations… [OAS and GIS] are an important part of our social welfare but they were designed for a different time.”
“OAS, which is funded entirely from general taxpayer revenue, is projected to increase from $55 billion in 2024 to over $90 billion by 2030 – a 64% increase in just six years. This rapid growth is happening while the very generations expected to fund these payments are facing unprecedented economic challenges.”
"Intergenerational equity is strained across the advanced world. Social welfare systems designed and enjoyed by previous generations will prove, absent reform, unaffordable for future ones."
— Mark Carney, Values: Building a Better World for All (p. 11)
“Tightening OAS eligibility is of course a terrible political move for a Prime Minister who owes his win to Boomers who trusted him to preserve their status quo, but it is a necessary move for a Prime Minister – or anyone, frankly – who can recognize that it is patently insane to keep handing out billions of dollars to wealthy seniors in this economic environment. If Mr. Carney is indeed “completely focused on getting our economy back on track,” he will ignore the political noise, and do it.”
— Robyn Urback, The Globe & Mail
"There’s a lot of work to do, but some top-line items, OAS is a big one. Essentially, we need to make sure that seniors, of course, stay out of poverty, but we should not be funding their luxury retirements because that’s not the point of these policies, and it’s really hurting younger generations and putting them in a position where they’re going to be paying off this debt for years and years to come. OAS should be cut off at the average income of Canadians of all ages."
— Sabrina Maddeaux (with Mike Moffatt) on the Missing Middle Podcast
