|
Bulletin Board |
|
|
Military And RCMP Veterans Against Pension Reduction At Age 65 |
||
|
MP, Peter Stoffer Comments On Billion Dollar G8/G20 Expenditure
(It's More Then Enough Money To Solve All Outstanding Veterans' Issues
|
||
|
Dated: 06 May 2010 Supporters Military/RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Reduction At Age 65 In a recent release, Mr Peter Stoffer, MP (NDP), Sackville/Eastern Shore, NS, alluded to the one billion dollar expenditure related to the G8/G20 conferences being hosted by the Canadian Government in Ontario. A synopsis of his comments is outlined below:
Roger Boutin Public Relations Coord M. R. (Mel) Pittman Web Master Military-RCMP Veteran's Campaign Against Pension Clawback At Age 65 URL: http://users.eastlink.ca/~clawback1/ |
||
|
Message from Peter Stoffer |
||
|
Dated: 06 May 2010 Supporters Military/RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Reduction At Age 65 On May 5th, my motion to reinstate all the clauses of Bill C-201 was approved by a majority vote. Bill C-201 aims to eliminate the unfair benefit reduction (clawback) of retired and disabled Canadian Forces and RCMP service pensions. We are pleased that all NDP MPs supported this motion and the majority of Liberal and Bloc Québécois members supported this motion. Some Liberal and Bloc members abstained from the vote or were not present. Almost all Conservative MPs voted against my motion, one Conservative MP voted for it, and one abstained. You can find the details of how your MP voted at this website: http://openparliament.ca/bills/votes/923/ or at www.parl.gc.ca. Right after the motion was approved to reinstate the clauses of C-201, the Speaker ruled that the bill be "discharged and dropped from the order paper" because it was not accompanied by a Royal Recommendation. That means that the bill is now dead. (The Speaker ruled last spring that certain private members bills require a Royal Recommendation because they propose the expenditure of public funds. Bill C-201 was one of these bills. I also asked the Speaker to reconsider the need for a Royal Recommendation on the basis the bill could be implemented by re-distributing certain program funds instead of requiring a new allocation of funds but the Speaker did not concur. Please see attached document that explains the Royal Recommendation process). As the Conservative government was not willing to provide their support or a Royal Recommendation, the bill can go no further in this parliamentary session and is dead. A Royal Recommendation may only be obtained by the Government and presented by a Minister. May I also say that had the Conservative government implemented my Veterans First Motion in 2006, the elimination of the benefit reduction of CF and RCMP service pensions would be underway. My Veterans First Motion was adopted by the majority of the House in November 2006. And it was Harper that said "...the government is duty bound to respect the decisions made by the House of Commons" (Hansard, 2005). Although I am disappointed that the bill is dead, we had many successes along the way. The issue became national in scope under the great leadership of John Labelle, Roger Boutin, and Mel Pittman, Wayne Wannamaker, Jim Lumsden, and many, many others across the country. CF and RCMP veterans coordinated a campaign that gained the support of over 110,000 individuals. Organizations including the Royal Canadian Legion (500,000 members), the Army, Navy And Air Force Veterans in Canada Association (20,000 members), and the Air Force Association in Canada (12,000 members) expressed their support for this initiative as well as members of the Yukon and Nova Scotia legislature. And, at the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs, we were successful in convincing CF and RCMP pension administrators that more communication is needed about how and why service pensions are reduced at age 65 or earlier. We were also successful in convincing the federal government that they need to address the injustice of reducing disabled CF and RCMP service pensions. I would like to thank John Labelle, Roger Boutin, and Mel Pittman, who are constituents from my riding of Sackville-Eastern Shore, for all of their work over the last five years. I also want to thank every single person who called, emailed, or wrote their Member of Parliament about the unfair reduction of their service pension. It is through your hard work that the bill made it this far in the parliamentary process. As the New Democrat Critic for Veterans Affairs, I will continue to work on ways we can correct this injustice of behalf of our veterans and their families. I plan to re-introduce the bill in the next Parliament (after the next election) and will continue to press the Conservative, Liberal and Bloc Québécois MPs about the importance of ending the unfair reduction of CF and RCMP service pensions. The bill, if passed, would have helped alleviate the financial pressure on many retired and disabled CF and RCMP veterans and their families. Thank you again for your tremendous interest and support for Bill C-201. Sincerely, Peter Stoffer, MP, Sackville-Eastern Shore 2900 Hwy #2 Fall River, NS B2T 1W4 Tel: (902) 861-2311 Fax: (902) 861-4620 Email: stoffp0@parl.gc.ca |
||
|
Conservative MP, Laurie HAWN'S Reply To Recent Clawback Campaign Correspondence |
||
|
Dated: 30 April 2010 Supporters Military/RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Reduction At Age 65 Click on this link (Reply from Laurie Hawn) to read an e-mail received from Laurie Hawn, 29 Apr 2010; his response to recent correspondence related to the Military And RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Benefit Reduction At Age 65. It is yet another feeble attempt on his part to explain the Conservative justification for not supporting Bill C-201. Of particular interest is the email that is attached to Laurie Hawn's from retired MWO (retired) Burt Fearon in which he supports the Conservative Government's position. Click return arrow at the top left of the window to return to this page. Web Master |
||
|
MPs Pension Funds Increased During Recession |
||
|
Dated: 14 April 2010 Supporters Military/RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Reduction At Age 65 The following article was recently released by the Canadian Press. Web Master The Canadian Press Date: Wednesday Apr. 7, 2010 9:18 PM ET OTTAWA - The gold-plated pension fund for members of Parliament rose by 10 per cent during the global recession -- thanks to Canadian taxpayers, whose own pension funds and retirement savings nosedived. A new report shows the half-billion-dollar pension fund for MPs and senators jumped in value by $53.8 million in 2008-09. Over the same period, private pension plans in Canada lost an average of 21 per cent of their value, according to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. Even the Canada Pension Plan reported a 14 per cent hit, losing $17.2 billion. Yet the parliamentary plan was immune to the market meltdown that decimated millions of Canadians' retirement nest eggs. That's because its interest rate is set by regulation and backed by ordinary taxpayers. The fund is not invested in the markets. Indeed, there is no actual money in the fund. It's strictly a paper account, for which taxpayers are on the hook when the bill eventually comes due. "It's all got to be backed by the taxpayers," says Bill Robson, president of the C.D. Howe Institute. "Not a dollar of real cash has gone into these plans so when the time comes to pay the pensions, all of this money is going to have to be raised either by real borrowing -- like actually floating bonds that people pay cash to invest in -- or through taxes." The annual fund report to Parliament for 2008-09, tabled recently, underscores just how "mind-bogglingly generous" the parliamentary pension plan is, Robson adds. He points out that ordinary taxpayers are limited by law to contributing up to 18 per cent of their annual income to registered retirement savings plans (RRSPs) or private pension plans. Federal public servants enjoy pension benefits that amount to about a third of their income, through a so-called defined-benefit plan that Robson has criticized for being too generous and unaffordable. But MPs and senators do considerably better than that, with pension benefits worth about half their income -- and indexed to inflation. "The rulers have a very generous pension compared to what they allow the ruled to have," Robson says. "That's monumentally unfair. I can't think of any justification for it." Kevin Gaudet, head of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, says there's a "Niagara Falls of a chasm" between the private and parliamentary pension plans. The parliamentary pension report comes as Canadians are being warned of a looming pension crisis, in which they're going to have to work longer and save more to retire with even a modest income. Gaudet doubts many Canadians are aware that "not only do they not have enough of their own money saved but they're also paying through the nose in their taxes so that they can feather the retirement beds of public sector employees and politicians. "I think they ought to be mad. It's a huge discrepancy." The taxpayers' federation calculates that after serving only six years, an MP is entitled to an annual pension of $27,000. Long-serving MPs can collect more than $100,000 a year. Having just completed his fourth year as prime minister, Stephen Harper is now eligible to collect a special retirement allowance once he turns 65 -- on top of his MP's pension, which he can begin collecting at 55. By Gaudet's calculation, that means Harper will eventually collect an annual pension and allowance worth at least $178,000. "Wow, that's the good life." Web Master's Comment: The above is a classic example of hypocrisy at work. In November 2009 the Conservative Government voted against Bill C-201 because they said it was too costly to implement but yet, without hesitation, they themselves saw their own pension funds grow at 10 percent at tax payers expense at a time when the economy was in a recession. Veterans are called upon to forward their strongest objections to their Members Of Parliament and the Prime Minister over this outrageous waste of Tax payers monies. MPs live in a lap of luxury during retirement while some Veterans visit special "Veteran's Food Banks" to survive. What's wrong with this picture! |
||
|
Former Member Of The RCAF Criticizes Campaign In Letter To The Editor, Hfx Chronicle Herald |
||
|
Dated: 18 January 2010 
Yet another self-righteous retiree has come out against the Military And RCMP Veterans Campaign Against The
Reduction Of Pension Benefits At Age 65.
A letter in the Sunday edition of the Halifax Chronicle Herald, 10 Jan 2010, submitted by Ralph Pick of Truro, NS,
advocates that we, (Canada's Veterans) Got what we paid for. Obviously; he hasn't given any thought to
the 31 billion in surplus pension funds that the former Liberal government utilized to pay down the national debt some
years ago. Where does he think those funds came from.
In order for the government to have accumulated such a vast surplus in federal pension assets, they obviously charged
all federal pension plan contributors more then was actually required to fund the various plans in the first place; including
the CFSA and the RCMP/SA.
I find it intolerable that a few misguided Veterans who just happen to disagree with aim of this Campaign have elected to
go public and ridicule their fellow Veterans. Have they forgotten the meaning of the word: Camaraderie? I
guess those people were really never true members of the Service Family to begin with.
Oh Yes; we will suck it up, but we will also soldier on fighting this unfair reduction of our pension benefits upon attaining
age 65 and I wonder if we do succeed; will the abstainers refuse the increase in their respective pension benefits
!
Web Master |
||
|
Paper By Former Apprentice Soldier (Retired Senior Officer) Denounce CFSA/RCMPSA "Clawback" Issue |
||
|
Dated: 30 November 2009
There is a Paper titled: The Rise and Fall of Bill C-201; circulating that was prepared by Mr Robert (Bob) Elliott,
of Kelowna, BC, a former Canadian Army apprentice soldier (retired senior officer), in which he denounced the efforts of Mr Peter
Stoffer, MP (NDP) and the supporters of the Military And RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Benefit Reduction At
Age 65. This so-called Paper does nothing more then outline the writer's politically motivated, unfounded opinion,
concerning the provisions of Bill C-201. Throughout the document in question the writer expounds upon the NDP's support for the
Clawback, thereby revealing his true political colors; plus, his general lack of concern for his fellow veterans. I don't question
his right to oppose the provisions of Bill C-201, but I do take exception to his inferring that supporters of the Campaign are
fools.
Right from the start, the organizers of this Campaign and Mr Stoffer, knew that it was going to be an uphill battle with the
Government of the day, however; not in our wildest dreams, did we ever expect to have to debate the issue with fellow veterans.
Yes, of course; some were going to disagree with the issue, that is to be expected, but to go public in an attempt to counter our
argument when all we are attempting to do is help those Veterans who are much less fortunate then what Mr Elliott obviously is.
Such action by a fellow veteran (and a senior officer to boot) is deemed inappropriate and is just what the Government of the day
was looking for. It undoubtedly, makes Laurie Hawn. MP (C), Edmonton Center, feel that he has at least one fellow Veteran who
agrees with him concerning Bill C-201.
Web Master |
||
|
NDP Leader, Jack Layton Comments On Bill C-201's Demise In Committee |
||
Dated: 25 November 2009 Thank you for your previous message of support for New Democrat Peter Stoffer's legislation, Bill C-201, An Act to amend the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police Superannuation Act (deletion of deduction from annuity). While you may have already received this news, I want to ensure everyone who has contacted me is made aware of the recent developments with C-201. Regrettably, Bill C-201 was defeated when Conservative and Liberal MPs joined to completely gut the legislation during a review by the Standing Committee on Veterans Affairs. The attached letter by NDP Veterans Affairs critic Peter Stoffer explains the status of Bill C-201. Once again, our proud veterans are forced to wage another campaign to stop the clawbacks of their disability and service pensions. While you can always count on the backing of New Democrat MPs, both the Conservatives and Liberals need to account for their lack of support. In government, each Party wasted opportunities to return proper care and respect to Canadian military personnel who served our country well. It is clear that voting for Conservatives and Liberals does not mean more help for veterans. Again, thank you for your message. Feel free to pass along this email to anyone who may be interested. All the best. Sincerely, Jack Layton, MP (Toronto-Danforth) Leader, Canada's New Democrats E-mail: LaytoJ@parl.gc.ca |
||
|
Mr Scott Andrews, MP, Liberal, Avalon, NL Voted For Bill C-201 In VAC |
||
On behalf of the 300,000, plus, Military and RCMP Veterans throughout Canada and abroad who support the "Military And RCMP Veterans'
Campaign Against Pension Benefit Reduction At Age 65", we extend our sincere appreciation to Mr Scott Andrews, MP, Liberal, Avalon,
NL for voting in favour of Bill C-201 in VAC on 17 Nov 2009.
Though he was faced with the situation whereby his two Liberal Party colleagues in VAC abstained from voting; he none the less, followed
his conscience and voted "Yea". His display of intestinal fortitude is second only to his outstanding sense of responsibility as was displayed by him
choosing to stand behind Canada's Veterans. For that, we Thank Him!
M. R. (Mel) Pittman Web Master Dated: 24 Nov 09 |
||
| Bill C-201 Dies At The Hands Of Two Liberal MPs | ||
|
22 November 2009
Supporters Military/RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Reduction At Age 65
During the 17 November 2009 session of The Veterans' Affairs Committee which reviewed Bill C-201, the Bill met it's demise
at the Committee level, having been defeated in by a show of hands vote. The official minutes of the meeting reveal that the
following MPs were in attendance and voted accordingly:
Conservative Members:
Supporter should note that the abstention from voting by the two hypocritical Liberal MPs actually caused the demise of
Bill C-201. Had they supported the original Liberal Party position on the Bill during First and Second Reading, it would have
passed in Committee and been subsequently referred back to the House Of Commons for a Third and Final vote. Supporters
of this Campaign are asked to express their dissatisfaction with the two Liberal members in question.
The third Liberal on the Committee, Scott Andrews, Avalon, St John's, NL is to be congratulated for supporting the Bill
while his two associates sat silently, abstaining from voting.
Though the political side of this Campaign is now put on hold for the time being, don't despair; Mr Stoffer will be re-visiting the
Clawback Issue following the next federal election at which time we will once again argue the unfairness of the reduction
of the Military and RCMP service pensions upon attaining age 65; hopefully, in front of a new government.
Roger Boutin Public Relations Coord M. R. (Mel) Pittman Web Master Military-RCMP Veteran's Campaign Against Pension Clawback At Age 65 |
||
|