The Fraser Institute has argued recently that the federal government has failed to make a convincing case for Canada Pension Plan (CPP) expansion. But their viewpoint depends heavily on trying to determine how much income Canadians need to retire with dignity.

Do we require a 50 per cent replacement of final earnings; or is it 70 per cent? Does spending go up or down when we retire? Can you sell your house and move to a less expensive region? Since none of these questions have solid, precise answers, the institute can claim the feds have not made the case for an expanded CPP.

Like many of you, I have wasted a few hours recently watching the U.S. presidential candidates' debates. I often find myself shaking my fist at my TV screen yelling: "You have not answered the question!" I feel the same way about the Fraser Institute analysis on CPP. While it is accurate, it does nothing to shed light on the matter at hand.

So, do we really need an expanded CPP?

The best available Canadian data all have the same bottom line: expect a significant decline in standard of living at retirement.

Thankfully, we have solid Canadian research available to let us know if future generations of Canadian workers can retire with dignity.

A 2015 McKinsey report uses survey results and concludes that 17 per cent of the future elderly will suffer a decline in their standard of living in retirement. A 2009 study prepared for the Research Working Group on Retirement Income Adequacy used income tax data and concluded that 22 per cent of future elderly will suffer a significant decline in their standard of living.

Two other studies used Statistics Canada's LifePaths microsimulation model to simulate future outcomes. The first, from the C.D. Howe Institute in 2010, suggests the future elderly will face declines of 44 per cent, while a 2011 study from the Institute for Research on Public Policy shows a 50 per cent decline in standard of living.

In other words, the best available Canadian data -- even given that they vary substantially -- all have the same bottom line: expect a significant decline in standard of living at retirement.

All four studies show that the risk of a declining standard of living in retirement is largely a middle- and upper-income earner problem, concentrated among the youngest age groups and those not participating in a workplace pension plan. For low-income workers, the combination of OAS and GIS will replace more than 100 per cent of their final earnings.

Do these studies "prove" the need for expansion of the CPP? No -- no more than the Fraser Institute study made the case against expansion.