MPs Not Seeking Re-Election May Be Doing It For The Severance And Pension: Expert

OTTAWA - Nearly 60 members of the just-ended 41st Parliament have decided against running again this fall.

Some moved on to provincial politics, like Conservatives Patrick Brown and Brian Jean, now leading conservative parties in Ontario and Alberta.

Others, like the NDP's Alexandrine Latendresse, who was among the young MPs from Quebec who were swept onto Parliament Hill in 2011, say the cut-and-thrust of the House of Commons has lost its appeal.

Rob Anders' pension nearly $100K a year, says taxpayer group

Calgary MP Rob Anders could collect a pension of nearly $100,000 if he leaves politics after his term ends.

The federal Conservative lost a nomination battle Saturday night to represent the party in the next election. Former Alberta cabinet minister Ron Liepert will be on the ballot for the new Signal Hill riding in 2015.

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation estimates Anders will start receiving a pension of $95,546 beginning at age 55. That is based on his current pay and assuming Anders will remain as an MP until the election.

Anders, 42, currently makes $163,700 as an MP, according to the Parliament of Canada website.

Many MPs will get pensions topping $100,000 a year for life

OTTAWA — Many federal politicians who decide to retire at the next election are set to walk away with millions of dollars from the lucrative parliamentary pension plan.

With a cabinet shuffle expected soon, some federal cabinet ministers have announced they won’t seek re-election and MPs from all parties are considering their political futures.

Taxpayers paying more than $25 for every dollar politicians contribute to MP pensions

OTTAWA — Canadians continue to pay more to fund a “gold-plated” parliamentary pension plan that spending watchdogs say has taxpayers ultimately contributing more than $25 for every dollar from MPs.

The federal government announced last fall it is overhauling the parliamentary pension plan — including tripling MP contributions and increasing retirement age — after the next election.

When it comes to MP pensions, principles take second place

Out of 52 Reform Party members who entered the House of Commons in 1993 raring to pull out their broom and clean up the self-serving mess they saw in Ottawa, only three ever stuck by their promise to reject the gold-plated pension that MPs awarded themselves.

As a Postmedia News story noted on the weekend,

    Former MPs Preston Manning, Lee Morrison and Werner Schmidt are believed to be the only three original Reformers, from the class of 52 Reform MPs elected in 1993, who not only stuck to their commitment to opt out of what they said was a gold-plated pension plan, but won’t receive any parliamentary pension whatsoever.

Pension reforms fall short of goal, says C.D. Howe report

A new report from a leading Canadian think-tank says legislation to reform public pensions is still too generous to federal employees and MPs, and too risky for taxpayers.

The C.D. Howe Institute report says the government is underestimating the plans' liabilities by about 40 per cent, or $100 billion, so taxpayers are on the hook for more than advertised.

The report says the changes are an improvement on the current system, but need to go further before an equitable distribution of benefits and risks is achieved.

Under the new law, public servants, members of Parliament and Senators will contribute roughly half of the reported cost service of the plans.

To reach a true 50-50 split between employee and taxpayer obligations, the pension plans would need to be radically altered, the think-tank says, or participant contributions would need to rise further.

The bill received Senate approval on Wednesday and requires only royal assent to become law.

Original Article
Source: CBC
Author: cbc

Changes to parliamentary pension plan ‘cowardly,’ MP says

OTTAWA — The Conservative government’s decision to dramatically hike MP pension contributions is being labelled “cowardly” by one Alberta member of Parliament who believes it will be difficult to recruit strong candidates for the House of Commons.

In a surprise move Friday, the House of Commons quickly passed changes to pensions for MPs and senators, bringing the plan more in line with pension plans of ordinary Canadians.

Cha-ching! Bev Oda retires with plump pension

OTTAWA - As Bev Oda rides off into the political sunset, the former international development minister known for her lavish tastes will start collecting her hefty MP's pension.

"Oda starts collecting her parliamentary pension on August 1 at the rate of $52,183 a year," Canadian Taxpayers Federation federal director Gregory Thomas said.

Harper should lead by example on pension austerity, Rae says

If the prime minister is going to raise the age for Old Age Security from 65 to 67, then he should lead by example and dump a $100,000 prime ministerial pension top-up, Liberal interim leader Bob Rae gibed on Friday afternoon.

As provided for in paragraph 48 of the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act, when the prime minister turns 65 he’ll begin to receive an annual “special allowance” equal to two thirds of his annual salary — that’s in addition to his pension.

The Liberals plan to table a sub-amendment to yesterday’s budget to get rid of it, Rae said.

“Not many Canadians are aware of it, quite apart from MPs’ pensions there’s a separate allowance for the prime minister, for a retiring prime minister that was brought in in 1992 for some particular reason,” Rae told a scrum of reporters.

“I don’t know why that would be.”

Original Article
Source: ipolitics
Author: ipolitics

MP pension reform bill to be introduced in fall

Legislation will be introduced this fall to turn the vague hints of MP pension reform made in this week's budget into concrete plans, government sources say.

Changes will be made to the age of entitlement and benefit levels, though they won't take effect until after the next election in 2015.

In the meantime, MPs will start contributing more to their own pensions next year and by 2016, will pay half.

In advance of Thursday's budget, the Conservatives hinted they would take a hard line on MP pensions, after they raised the eligibility age for Old Age Security benefits to 67 from 65.

But the budget Thursday was thin on details, sparking criticism that politicians weren't ready to take a hit while asking Canadians to take one on the chin.

"The fact that they put their own bank accounts ahead of the country at the same time as they are asking others to sacrifice, it's really disappointing," said Gregory Thomas, the federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.

Radio host puts Tony Clement’s feet to the fire on MP pensions

Conservative ministers are fanning out across the country this week, warning the long-term costs of Old Age Security must be curtailed in this year’s budget in order to be fair to young Canadians who will be paying the tax bill when most baby boomers are retired.

But one minister, Treasury Board President Tony Clement, was grilled Thursday as to how he could have the “moral authority” to cut pensions for average Canadians while MPs continue to enjoy far superior pensions funded by taxpayers.

Until now, federal ministers have been extremely coy as to whether they are planning to touch the MP pension scheme. There have been closed door meetings of Conservative MPs and Senators to discuss options, but no clear plans have emerged.

Meanwhile the cost of the MP pension plan has come under heightened scrutiny since the Conservatives started talking about changes to OAS and public sector pensions.

In an interview Thursday morning with host Bill Good on Vancouver’s CKNW radio, Mr. Clement acknowledged the government can’t act on some pensions without touching MP pensions.

Tories won't commit to MP pension cuts

OTTAWA — The federal Conservative government won't commit to scaling back lucrative pensions for MPs, as it searches for billions of dollars in cuts to federal programs and considers overhauling Old Age Security.

Federal politicians of all stripes are under increasing pressure to take a haircut on what spending watchdogs call a "gold-plated" pension plan, especially as government reins in expenditures to help eliminate a $31-billion deficit by 2015-16.

The screws have been tightened even further as the government looks for billions of dollars in cuts to federal programs and considers increasing the qualifying age for Old Age Security to 67 from the current 65.

The final decision on politicians' pensions falls with Treasury Board president Tony Clement, who said Tuesday all spending — including pensions for MPs — will be examined. But the government refuses to commit to cutting pension benefits for parliamentarians.

"We're reviewing the matter and all options are on the table," Clement told reporters Tuesday, but he wouldn't say whether that will actually amount to trimming the benefits.

The Conservatives were forced to explain themselves after government House leader Peter Van Loan seemed to indicate on Monday that the Tories would push for the secretive, multi-party Board of Internal Economy to trim pension benefits for MPs.

Tories using MP pension ‘diversion’ to avoid tackling retirement: NDP

The Harper government’s musings about reforming the MPs’ gold-plated pensions are simply a smokescreen to avoid dealing with retirement security for all Canadians, charge the NDP.

This, while the Canadian Taxpayers Federation is urging the Conservatives to make MP pension reform its priority – otherwise it has no credibility to tackle changes to other pension programs, such as Old Age Security.

“We believe the government is going to act on MP pensions in this budget,” says the CTF’s Federal Director, Gregory Thomas, referring to the upcoming spring budget. “We think the government is working on a big set of pension reforms, including public service pensions, Old Age Security, and the pooled registered pension plan legislation. And they need to take an axe to the MP pension plan to demonstrate that they’re really serious this time.”

Pensions continue to be the hot issue on Parliament Hill this week, given Stephen Harper’s speech in Davos, Switzerland, where he first suggested reforming OAS.

In addition, the Prime Minister and Treasury Board President Tony Clement have also hinted that MP pensions may be part of the of the government’s efforts to cut between $4-billion and $8-billion from spending – the results of which will be revealed in the budget.

To add more fuel to the fire, Government House leader Peter Van Loan said earlier this week that government MPs sitting on the Board of Internal economy, which oversees management and spending of the House, have asked that the board “also do its fair share as part of the deficit reduction action plan.”

Conservatives vague on potential MP pension cuts

OTTAWA—Federal politicians appear united in their resolve to cut their glitzy pension plan at the same time as Ottawa debates overhauling seniors’ payments.

The only question is how best to proceed and how deep the cuts will be to a plan that provides a member of Parliament with only six years of service an annual payment of at least $40,000 by the age of 55.

And like all questions about how politicians use taxpayer dollars for expenses, salaries or for retirement, most MPs don’t want to talk about it.

“If there are (proposed) changes to it, then show us and then we’ll talk, but other than that I don’t really know what we’re talking about other than a trial balloon,” said New Democrat Charlie Angus.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews was even more evasive.

“That’s something for the members to determine, I guess,” he said.

What’s clear is that as the government moves forward with proposed changes to the retirement payments to millions of elderly Canadians, they can’t avoid taking a hit in their own pensions.

Seeking elected office should never be about the money

It simply blows me away that we are spending a nanosecond on a discussion about outrageous MPs’ pay, pension, and perks while a huge number of people in the country are hurting.

Interim NDP leader Nycole Turmel tried yesterday to deflect the issue of MP pensions by calling on the Harper Government to ask a third party to review the matter.

Turmel’s suggestion is precisely why MP compensation should be slashed. MPs should be demonstrating national leadership and be examples for the rest of the country, not spending their time defending and protecting their own paycheque.

There are almost 1.5 million people who have declared themselves to be unemployed in Canada. Last quarter, our economy barely inched forward at 0.9%. Were it not for a commodity boom, unemployment would be a lot higher and the economy would be massively contracting.

While the federal balance sheet is relatively healthy, the total national debt (which includes what is carried by the provinces) is close to 80% of GDP. The government should be making some difficult decisions that parliamentarians will have to carefully scrutinize. Our fiscal situation cannot be allowed to recklessly deteriorate. At the same time, significant and intelligent investments should be made to expand the economy in areas such as productivity, critical infrastructure, education and training, to name a few. That will require some finesse and tough choices.

Clement, Baird qualify for lucrative MP pension amid calls for reform

Three senior Harper Ministers – Jim Flaherty, John Baird and Tony Clement – must be grinning widely today. The troika were elected exactly six years ago and now they can retire worry-free, having finally qualified for their gold-plated MP pensions.

They are each entitled to $68,000 a year if they hang on until 2015 – and $96,000 a year if they remain until 2019. It keeps increasing from there.

The three former provincial ministers left the Ontario legislature without a pension after the government they served in, the Mike Harris Conservative government, abolished pensions for MPPs.

And so their salaries and compensation have increased substantially from their Queen’s Park days. As federal ministers they earn $233,247 a year; as Ontario cabinet ministers they would be earning $165,851 a year.

They can begin collecting their MP pensions at age 55. Finance Minister Flaherty is 62, Treasury Board President Clement will celebrate his 51st birthday Friday and Foreign Affairs Minister Baird is 42.

Coincidentally, Mr. Clement is now eyeing the MP pension as part of his strategic review. As the Treasury Board President he needs to find $4-billion in annual savings from government. He has not said for sure if the MP pensions will be reformed.

Pensions: an MP's just desserts or the taxpayers' burden?

OTTAWA -- Just weeks before Canadians find out where the Conservatives plan to slash billions of dollars in spending, some analysts are pointing to the "gold plated" MP pensions as a good place to start.

"You go into the public service to serve the public," said Ian Lee, an economist and financial commentator from the Sprott School of Business at Carleton University in Ottawa. "If you want to just make a lot of money, my answer is always the same: just go into the private sector."

Lee noted it would be difficult to find a private-sector employee who becomes eligible for a pension at 55-years-old.

In order to qualify for a pension, an MP has to be in office at least six years plus one day, and contribute seven per cent of their salary for each of those years.

So if an MP earns the most basic salary and works for six years, they would earn $28,260 when after hitting their 55th birthday .

Tories ponder cuts to MP pensions after watchdog details lucrative trough

Treasury Board President Tony Clement is eyeing lucrative MP pensions as way of finding savings in his review of government spending – a move that could find support in the majority Conservative caucus.

A senior Tory MP, who asked not to be named, told The Globe the caucus will “support some reforms,” adding this will be a “caucus decision not an edict from PMO or Finance.”

Making the rounds of political talk shows Wednesday, Mr. Clement picked his words carefully about how he will handle the contentious issue. He said he has been “tasked with putting some options forward” on pension reform.

“I think you’ve got to be fair to the employee [the MP] but you also have to be fair to the taxpayer,” he told CTV’s Don Martin. “We are very cognizant of that.”

He added that no decisions have been made and that already the government is leading by example as MP and cabinet-minister salaries have been frozen this year. MPs earn $157,000 a year; cabinet ministers make $233,247 and the Prime Minister earns $315,000.

MP pensions 'a ripoff on a massive scale'

Taxpayers put in $23.30 for every $1 members contribute to provide 'outrageous' returns, advocacy group says

The Canadian Taxpayers Federation says it's high time MPs stopped making Canadians pick up the tab for their "gold-plated" pension plan.

"This is a ripoff on a massive scale," the advocacy group's federal director, Gregory Thomas, said at a news con-ference on Parliament Hill Wednesday announcing its report on parliamentarians' pensions.

The federation says while officially taxpayers contribute $5.80 for every dollar an MP contributes to his or her pension, that figure does not include "disguised 'interest' and accounting fiction." Its calculations say taxpayers are actually on the hook for $23.30 for every dollar an MP contributes.

While MPs earn a base salary of $157,731 per year, the total contributions to the parliamentary pension fund amounts to $248,668 per year, Thomas said.

MPs are eligible to collect full pension benefits when they are 55, if they sit in Parliament for six years or longer. If all current MPs collected their pensions, Thomas said, the total lifetime payout would amount to $277 million.

Thomas said the MP pension fund does not invest in the market like the Canada Pension Plan or RRSPs. Instead, it dips into public coffers each quarter.

If We Don’t Pay Our MPs, Someone Else Will

Of course, the Harper regime is being more than a little hypocritical when it launches an attack on public-sector pensions while continuing to collect its own gold-plated pensions, currently at a cost of around $50 million per year. And Stephen I’s about-face on pensions — he once claimed that every MP who refused to opt out of the pension should be kicked out of the party, but now pays into one himself — is one of the most scandalous episodes in the history of Conservative corruption.

But with all that said, I think we have to be very careful how we word our criticism here. Would you really be happier seeing your own pension (if you’re fortunate enough to have one) cut to the bone if you knew that MPs, most of whom have other sources of income or even other pensions anyways, were making the same cuts? And, more to the point, would government really be more democratic if we paid our MPs less money?

Maybe. But there are two points to keep in mind here. First, the MP pension scheme doesn’t actually cost us all that much money. According to John Ivison’s latest broadside against Parliamentary pensions, the scheme pays out around $50 million per year. That amounts to less than $1.50 per Canadian. Let’s suppose we slashed MP pensions by half. That would bring the cost down to 75 cents. You can take your personal savings and go buy an extra juice box.

Second, we should be asking ourselves what MPs should be paid. CEOs of large multinational companies get anywhere from tens of millions to hundreds of millions of dollars per year, running corporations a fraction of the size of the Canadian economy. Now, I’m not saying that Stephen I deserves a $100 million a year salary, let alone anyone else.

But, every Member of Parliament is charged with passing laws which apply to all Canadians, representing their particular riding at the national level, and either overseeing government (if they are in Cabinet) or holding government accountable to the people (if they are not). Now, how much should someone with those responsibilities be paid? Pierre Karl Peladeau, the Quebecor CEO who oversees the odious Sun Media enterprise, only performs the last of those four duties, and not very well at that. He gets $5 million per year.

And there’s another equally serious point, which I’ve left to last only because it sounds vaguely paranoid. When it comes to paying people in positions of high public trust, we’re not just paying what we think is reasonable — we’re paying enough, and keeping them under a tight enough legal leash, that they’re not sorely tempted to accept additional pay from somebody else. As in, bribes.

As I say, that sounds slightly paranoid. But then again, the man who is currently our Prime Minister once tried to bribe a terminally ill MP with a $1 million life insurance policy in exchange for his cooperation on a single vote. If we don’t pay our MPs generously, someone else will.
Original Article
Source: sixth Estate