Stephen Harper tells Tory MPs that generous pensions will be trimmed


Locutus
+3
#1
OTTAWA—Prime Minister Stephen Harper has put his Conservative caucus on notice the government is about to begin gradually chipping away at the generous pension plans enjoyed by Members of Parliament.

Pensions for MPs, which far exceed what most people collect in retirement, have become a political liability when Harper is asking Canadians to wait longer for Old Age Security eligibility in the future and pensions for federal employees are being scaled back.

“They need to lead by example,” said Gregory Thomas, federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “There’s no doubt that they plan some pretty serious tinkering” with the current system, he said.

The new MPs’ pension arrangements are still being discussed with Harper’s 163-member caucus, some of whom are concerned about losing future entitlements, according to Tory insiders. But changes to retirement benefits are expected within a few weeks when a second budget implementation bill comes before Parliament.

To enlist the support of Conservative MPs, the new plan is expected to be phased in, meaning today’s MPs will not lose any of the future pay-outs that have accrued so far.


more


Stephen Harper tells Tory MPs that generous pensions will be trimmed - thestar.com
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#2
Quote: Originally Posted by Locutus View Post

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Stephen Harper has put his Conservative caucus on notice the government is about to begin gradually chipping away at the generous pension plans enjoyed by Members of Parliament.

Pensions for MPs, which far exceed what most people collect in retirement, have become a political liability when Harper is asking Canadians to wait longer for Old Age Security eligibility in the future and pensions for federal employees are being scaled back.

“They need to lead by example,” said Gregory Thomas, federal director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. “There’s no doubt that they plan some pretty serious tinkering” with the current system, he said.

The new MPs’ pension arrangements are still being discussed with Harper’s 163-member caucus, some of whom are concerned about losing future entitlements, according to Tory insiders. But changes to retirement benefits are expected within a few weeks when a second budget implementation bill comes before Parliament.

To enlist the support of Conservative MPs, the new plan is expected to be phased in, meaning today’s MPs will not lose any of the future pay-outs that have accrued so far.


more


Stephen Harper tells Tory MPs that generous pensions will be trimmed - thestar.com

I love it!
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
+1
#3
I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, it's just talk, talk, talk. Sounds great, means nothing.
 
tay
+1
#4
Well that would be a microscopic start. I wonder if they will come up with a scheme similar to what the Harris Cons did in Ontario?

And I will even use a fox north link ............


Taxpayers gleeful the Conservatives appear ready to scramble MPs' golden nest eggs may want to pay heed to this cautionary tale.

When former Ontario premier Mike Harris phased out lavish MPP pensions in 1996, he ended up with egg on his face by including a compensation deal that dinged taxpayers to the tune of $109 million - $52 million more than what was in the MPP retirement fund at the time.

Five MPPs were made overnight millionaires when the pensions were dismantled and replaced by RRSPs.

Sixty-one MPPs are estimated to have received the lump-sum "present value" payouts, which were placed into retirement instruments that could be accessed at age 55.

Harris himself netted about an $800,000 settlement, as did current Conservative senator and former MPP Bob Runciman.

Runciman was among the politicians calling for the cash settlements to be made public in 1996 when reporters caught hold of the story, but full details of the payments were never revealed.

Interim Liberal leader Bob Rae - and former Ontario premier - was among those who received an estimated $1 million compensation package.

Rae was asked Wednesday whether he was concerned the same type of buyout bonanza could happen at the federal level if the Conservatives make good on hints that MP pensions are under scrutiny.

He argued political pensions should be competitive, but also "seen by everybody to be fair and reasonable."

Rae underscored that the Harris government was responsible for the sweetheart compensation package. Rae left Queen's Park in early 1996.

"Nobody expects or wants a windfall," Rae said. "It does seem like a crazy situation - I fully recognize it." Treasury Board President Tony Clement and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty - who would shepherd in pension reforms, if any - were also both MPPs under Harris at the time, but being newly elected, didn't qualify for compensation.



http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&...ulO7Lkx75cY69Q
 
Machjo
+2
#5
Then one way to avoid the compensation dilemma, jsut have the new law apply only to new MPs.
 
relic
Free Thinker
+2
#6
The way el harpo runs things,nobody will be able to find out the details anyway.
 
taxslave
Free Thinker
+1
#7
About time. I think machjo is right. Just make it apply to new MPs and hope the current crop die off at an early age although a buyout could still be cheaper in the long run than phasing it in.
 
55Mercury
+2
#8
yay Stevo.

but I can't help but see this as a prelude to cutting back my pension.

arrgh
 
taxslave
Free Thinker
#9
AN even better solution would be to simply not reelect any MP to a second term. Then they do not qualify for pension. We also need to do away with severance pay for government retirees.
 
Fletch
#10
Only the Liberals and NDP dont get to see a second term... Its evolution. Im OK with my Tory MP remaining for more than 1 but Steve Harpers latest step in the pension plan is great news...

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

AN even better solution would be to simply not reelect any MP to a second term. Then they do not qualify for pension. We also need to do away with severance pay for government retirees.

 
Machjo
#11
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslave View Post

AN even better solution would be to simply not reelect any MP to a second term. Then they do not qualify for pension. We also need to do away with severance pay for government retirees.

What if the MP is worth reelecting?
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

What if the MP is worth reelecting?

Well an exception could be made but should definitely be limited to one in a thousand!
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, it's just talk, talk, talk. Sounds great, means nothing.

Yep.

Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

What if the MP is worth reelecting?

lol You're joking, right? Are there any?
 
Machjo
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Yep.

lol You're joking, right? Are there any?

I'm just opposed to term limits in principle since in principle if the people want to reelect a person they should be free to do so.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
#15
Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

I'm just opposed to term limits in principle since in principle if the people want to reelect a person they should be free to do so.

Ah, then someone who alienates the western provinces can keep getting in and alienating all they want to just because the majority of Canada's population is back east. Nice. Turdeau - 15 years of primping the east at the expense of western Canada and the Maritimes.
 
darkbeaver
Republican
#16
Tighten your belts kiddies cuz this is big brother being seen taking the medicine that will taste like **** when the spoon gets to you, and you will swallow.
 
Machjo
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Ah, then someone who alienates the western provinces can keep getting in and alienating all they want to just because the majority of Canada's population is back east. Nice. Turdeau - 15 years of primping the east at the expense of western Canada and the Maritimes.

If that's their mood, then they'll just vote in someone similar or worse. Better the devil you know...
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

Ah, then someone who alienates the western provinces can keep getting in and alienating all they want to just because the majority of Canada's population is back east. Nice. Turdeau - 15 years of primping the east at the expense of western Canada and the Maritimes.

That will only work for a little while, the centre of population is moving west every year!
 
WLDB
No Party Affiliation
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, it's just talk, talk, talk. Sounds great, means nothing.

He did give MPs a pay cut about 2 years ago. No reason not to believe he'd do something like this with pensions. I think its a good move. They get way too much in their pensions and dont have to work very long to get it.

Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

That will only work for a little while, the centre of population is moving west every year!

True but they wont have the same hangups as people who have lived there for decades. Most will have little to no knowledge of NEP and as a result wont whine about it for decades. It was a major screw up but it was a generation ago.

Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post


lol You're joking, right? Are there any?

There are a few I like. There's bound to be a few given there's a total of 308.

The cynics who say all politicians are the same/bad only have themselves to blame. Its the people who elect them. They didnt appoint themselves.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

The cynics who say all politicians are the same/bad only have themselves to blame. Its the people who elect them. They didnt appoint themselves.

True but in each riding you may have 4 or 5 candidates to pick from. What are the chances of one being good? I generally vote just out of general principles, and try for the one where the stench is the mildest! Even the most well meaning and basically honest one finds that once he/she gets to Ottawa they are TOLD what the agenda is!
 
Machjo
+1
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by JLM View Post

True but in each riding you may have 4 or 5 candidates to pick from. What are the chances of one being good? I generally vote just out of general principles, and try for the one where the stench is the mildest! Even the most well meaning and basically honest one finds that once he/she gets to Ottawa they are TOLD what the agenda is!

So vote for an independent candidate or hand in a blank ballot.
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
+1
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Machjo View Post

If that's their mood, then they'll just vote in someone similar or worse. Better the devil you know...

That makes everything all right then.
They went from Turdeau to Bullroney to ChRETIeN to aPAULing , and not one could really have given 2 hoots about western Can. and the Maritimes. That's why I am pretty much against our centralised gov't having so much power.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by SLM View Post

I'll believe it when I see it. Until then, it's just talk, talk, talk. Sounds great, means nothing.

I think he's committed himself to at least some token action. I'm a little sceptical about the extent he proposes, but even if it's 10% better it's a start and better than any other hog at the trough has accomplished!

Quote: Originally Posted by L Gilbert View Post

That makes everything all right then.
They went from Turdeau to Bullroney to ChRETIeN to aPAULing , and not one could really have given 2 hoots about western Can. and the Maritimes. That's why I am pretty much against our centralised gov't having so much power.

As long as the capital is in Ottawa the problems will continue. Perhaps they should move it to Canal Flats, that place looks like it could use a "shot in the arm".
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
+1
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by WLDB View Post

He did give MPs a pay cut about 2 years ago. No reason not to believe he'd do something like this with pensions. I think its a good move. They get way too much in their pensions and dont have to work very long to get it.

True nuff.

Quote:

True but they wont have the same hangups as people who have lived there for decades. Most will have little to no knowledge of NEP and as a result wont whine about it for decades. It was a major screw up but it was a generation ago.

Well, it also wasn't the only issue.

Quote:

There are a few I like. There's bound to be a few given there's a total of 308.

The cynics who say all politicians are the same/bad only have themselves to blame. Its the people who elect them. They didnt appoint themselves.

I can't blame myself. And I have been voting Indie for 3 elections now for a few reasons; one being that I am fed up with parties, another being that I think Indies are more liekly to be objective, wiser, and balanced than toadies who follow party lines. There are more but those are good enough. And who can blame anyone in western Canada or the Maritimes? We simply don't have the population base to buck the central Canada vote. ON and QC have 62% of the population of voters and most seats by far. And for a developed nation, we have one of the most archaic and unfair election systems around.
 
DaSleeper
+3
#25
My basic work pension was a percentage of the average my five best year times the number of years of service.....
I can't see why MP,s couldn't have a similar formula
 
L Gilbert
No Party Affiliation
+2
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper View Post

My basic work pension was a percentage of the average my five best year times the number of years of service.....
I can't see why MP,s couldn't have a similar formula

hehe They make the rules, that's why.
 
JLM
No Party Affiliation
+1
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper View Post

My basic work pension was a percentage of the average my five best year times the number of years of service.....
I can't see why MP,s couldn't have a similar formula

Greed??????????
 
SLM
No Party Affiliation
+4
#28  Top Rated Post
Quote: Originally Posted by DaSleeper View Post

My basic work pension was a percentage of the average my five best year times the number of years of service.....
I can't see why MP,s couldn't have a similar formula

I say make them live off the CPP. Betcha' they'll take way better care of the fund that way too.
 
tay
#29
Changes to parliamentary pension plan ‘cowardly,’ MP says

Edmonton MP Peter Goldring, a former disgraced Conservative caucus member, said the hefty increase in contributions will dramatically reduce take-home pay for MPs who earn $157,731 in base salary, and ultimately make it far more difficult to attract top quality politicians.


Changes to parliamentary pension plan




Top quality like him?


After a party on the evening of Saturday, December 3, 2011, Peter Goldring was stopped by the Edmonton Police Service , during a routine roadside spot-check program to curb impaired driving.Goldring, who has publicly opposed the use of breathalyzers to catch impaired drivers, refused to provide a breath sample.Shortly after the incident, Goldring resigned from the caucus of the Conservative Party of Canada. He sits as an independent member of the House of Commons, and has asked to be recognized as an Independent Conservative.

Don't let the door hit you on the ass on your way out, Pete.



Peter Goldring - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Liberalman
Free Thinker
#30
Quick get a medical doctor our Canadian Prime Minister has had a mental break he is starting to believe in what his party stands for, truth, accountability and transparency. If his inner circle finds out he will be toast and the Canadian people will put him on the same level as the late Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau.