Prime Minister Stephen Harper must come clean about the real reasons for his changes to the age of accessing Old Age Security: to persuade/force Canadians to work longer.
Mr. Harper’s original justification for changing the age of accessibility — because it will be too expensive for the federal government in the future — has been deflated via reports by Ken Page, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, as well as by the C.D. Howe Institute and by the authoritative Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD).
So why did he suddenly spring the proposed change in Switzerland without the courtesy and courage to inform Canadians first? Was it to impress his foreign friends? Perhaps, but as likely, it was to hide his real motive, which was exposed by a recent study by the consulting firm of McKinsey & Co.
The report linked the OAS changes to the charges surreptitiously introduced to delay access to the Canada Pension Plan. Taken together, they are designed to induce Canadians born after 1958 (that is, only a portion of the Baby Boomers as well as subsequent generations) to work beyond 65.
To achieve the same objective he could have retained the original age to access OAS and added incentives to voluntarily delay access (as he did with CPP). And he could have engaged in an open and honest discourse with Canadians in Canada as to why he was making the proposal. But, obviously that’s not how he operates.
Finally, benefits existed under the previous system for accessing CPP as old as 70 rather than at 60 or 65. However, the average age of retirement is still 62. This suggests that Mr. Harper’s policy may not attain its objective in the future because, whether he likes it not, Canadians may continue to act as they please.
Original Article
Source: Star
Author: William Gleberzon
Mr. Harper’s original justification for changing the age of accessibility — because it will be too expensive for the federal government in the future — has been deflated via reports by Ken Page, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, as well as by the C.D. Howe Institute and by the authoritative Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD).
So why did he suddenly spring the proposed change in Switzerland without the courtesy and courage to inform Canadians first? Was it to impress his foreign friends? Perhaps, but as likely, it was to hide his real motive, which was exposed by a recent study by the consulting firm of McKinsey & Co.
The report linked the OAS changes to the charges surreptitiously introduced to delay access to the Canada Pension Plan. Taken together, they are designed to induce Canadians born after 1958 (that is, only a portion of the Baby Boomers as well as subsequent generations) to work beyond 65.
To achieve the same objective he could have retained the original age to access OAS and added incentives to voluntarily delay access (as he did with CPP). And he could have engaged in an open and honest discourse with Canadians in Canada as to why he was making the proposal. But, obviously that’s not how he operates.
Finally, benefits existed under the previous system for accessing CPP as old as 70 rather than at 60 or 65. However, the average age of retirement is still 62. This suggests that Mr. Harper’s policy may not attain its objective in the future because, whether he likes it not, Canadians may continue to act as they please.
Original Article
Source: Star
Author: William Gleberzon
No comments:
Post a Comment