Unlocking a locked-in Pension (RRSP)

[oldman]

Hi : This was a commentary on Owensound Radio.

Please write your MPP and the Leaders and tell them your story or just tell them you want these pensions unlocked the same as the other 4 provinces.

Hon.James J Bradley Minister Responsible for Seniors

jbradley.mpp@liberal.ola.org

Hon Dalton McGuinty Premier
dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org

Hon Greg Sorbara Finance Minister
gsorbara.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org

Howard Hampton Leader of the NDP
hhampton-qp@ndp.on.ca

John Tory Leader of the Progressive Conservative Party
john.tory@pc.ola.org

And also please sign the online petition at
http://www.petitiononline.com/WRC101/petition.html


Take Care Bill Costello




Commentary can be heard on 560 CFOS Tuesdays & Thursdays at 7:08 am and 5:08 pm



Ross Kentner Commentary for Thursday, March 15th 2007:


People who heard my recent comment on Employment Insurance said they had never heard me so angry. Well, here’s another government scam that has me steamed. This time it’s the Ontario Government that is ripping us off. Now that I’m 65 and thinking of retiring in another five years, I’m looking at how I hope to fund my future.



It’s not a surprise to find I could have started saving sooner or could have been a smarter investor over time. But it’s a shock to learn that the instrument I thought was designed to furnish retirement income is not mine to use as I wish. And, while it may warehouse me when I can’t get around anymore, it will pay me at under the poverty rate when I finally have a chance to pursue hobbies or travel. That’s because, like many of you listening, my retirement account is locked-in.



You probably thought locked-in meant you can’t access your retirement account until you qualify to retire. Actually, it means the government has usurped control of your money and will only give it back to you in dribs and drabs…from 2.5 to 6.3 per cent a year. Do the math…it’s peanuts! You can’t live in Ontario in 2007 on that and you sure as heck won’t be able to live on it if you don’t retire for another 15 or 20 years!



Why did I call this a scam? The formula the government uses assumes you’ll live to 90. But according to Statistics Canada, less than one half of one per cent of us ever reach 90. If I die at 77, which is the average for Canadian men, I’ll never see by far the greater percentage of the money that I and, at one time, my employer paid into my retirement fund.



Can I prove this is a government-sponsored scam? What better proof than this? In 1999 when pension plans for Members of the Legislature were eliminated, a special bill was passed enabling MPPs to transfer their pensions to their personal RRSPs. Our elected members have full control over their previous pension funds. In other words, as things stand now, there is a law for Members of the Provincial Parliament and another law for the rest of us.



In opposition, the Liberals criticized this double standard. In office, they have done nothing about it. Andrea Horwath, MPP for Hamilton East has moved a private member’s bill to give all Ontario residents the option to transfer their locked-in pension funds to a RRIF. Bill 175 must be passed. There is no reason on earth for a government to control a taxpayer’s access to their own money. There’s even less when MPPs have unlocked their own pensions

 

[GenGap]

Are you adware if you are a hardworking individual who invested into your retirement and fall on bad times, you are forced In Ontario to Cash in your RRSPS before collecting social Assistance?

I feel that is very wrong!

All of the Provinces as well as the Federal Government have their own Rules and Regulations concerning Locked-in RRSPs. Probably only you people that have one would know what I mean.
There are only two Provinces that allow you to unlock these RRSPs (Sask. being one). Manitoba allows you to unlock 50% (once). Ontario allows ex MPPs to unlock theirs, but nobody else. The Federal Government is the most restrictive. Since we are ALL Canadians we should ALL be treated the same. Isn't that what we have a Constitution for? The new Federal Finance Minister is an ex MPP from Ontario, so can unlock his. This should be standardized across the country. Banks and other institutions don't know what rules to follow. Hundreds in Ontario lost money recently in a scheme to extract money that was locked-in. Are there any of you in this situation?

 

[oldman]

Hi I would like to introduce Professor Jack M. Mintz.

He just wrote an article on why locked in pensions should be unlocked. It was posted in the Toronto National Post.

I will be posting following this.




Jack M. Mintz

Professor of Business Economics
Degrees

PhD, University of Essex
MA, Queen's University
BA, University of Alberta







Positions Held

Academic Positions
Current

Professor, Business Economics, Rotman School of Management
Current

Director, International Tax Program, Rotman School of Management
1999- 2006

President and CEO, C. D. Howe Institute
1993-1995

Associate Dean (Academic), Faculty of Management, University of Toronto
1984-1989

Associate Professor, Queen's University
1986

Visiting Associate Professor, Department of Economics, Carleton University
1981, 1985

Visiting Researcher, CORE, Belgium
1978-1984

Assistant Professor, Department of Economics, Queen's University

Non-Academic Positions
1984-1985

Special Advisor to Assistant Deputy Minister, Corporate Tax Research, Department of Finance, Government of Canada
1974-1975, 1976

Consultant, Economic Council of Canada, Financial Markets Group
1971-1973

Budget Bureau and Fiscal Planning, Alberta Government

 

[oldman]

Unlock LIRAs:

Workers who change jobs get hobbled with inflexible locked-in accounts. It's time to end this nanny-state paternalism

Jack Mintz, Financial Post
Published: Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Compared with the United States, with its bewildering and complex array of retirement savings plans, Canada has a proud record of levelling the playing field between pension plans and Registered Retirement Savings Plans (RRSPs): We ensure that similar rules apply to them and we make them transferable. Given the evolving labour markets, with people quitting jobs frequently throughout their career, and given our ageing population, our federal and provincial politicians deserve credit for reducing tax barriers to labour mobility and savings.
Yet, one important form of discrimination remains: the locked-in RRSP. It puts millions of pensioned employees at a severe disadvantage compared with RRSP holders who change jobs. Ontario's recent budget takes an initial step to correct this discrimination, but does not go far enough, especially when compared with some provinces that have done much more to remove this discrimination.
When a pensioned employee quits, a choice is made to keep money invested in the pension plan or to take out the money and invest it in a locked-in RRSP (either called Locked-in Funds or Locked-in Retirement Accounts, LIRAs). The money cannot be accessed until a certain age, such as at retirement (this depends on federal and provincial pension legislation) and these funds must then be invested in a life annuity or Life Income Fund. With the Life Income Fund, the investor draws out money subject to mandated maximum and minimum percentages of assets held in the plan. At the age of 80, remaining investments must be converted to an annuity (with 60% spousal benefit) or transferred to a Life Retirement Income Fund that allows the holders to manage their own money (but still subject to mandated withdrawal rules).

Nonetheless, with the locked-in rules for pension transfers, why even bother with a defined-contribution plan since employees could have the same risk and return, but much greater flexibility, with an employer-provided RRSP when changing jobs?
The usual argument against repealing lock-in provisions is a paternalistic one: Workers don't know what is best for them and will cash out their pension savings before retirement. This nanny-state view has been a basis for policy in some other countries, notably the United States, which has imposed penalties on early withdrawals from retirement savings plans. Canada, however, has smartly avoided this trap by enabling individuals to have full access to their RRSPs without extra penalty for withdrawals before retirement. Not only does this give greater flexibility for individuals, but also provides a significant incentive to invest in retirement funds, since individuals need not fear that their money is effectively locked up when facing unexpected contingencies. Locked-in RRSPs are therefore particularly unfair to pensioned workers since they do have the same rights to access their retirement funds.
With the recent budget, Ontario is proposing to allow individuals to unlock 25% of their funds no earlier than the early retirement date (usually 55 years of age), beginning in 2008, after consultations. At this time, individuals can only access their own money if they show special need, once they follow a costly bureaucratic procedure. According to the Canadian Association for Retired Persons, during the period of April, 2003, to March, 2006, almost 30,000 pensioners applied for relief, filling out a 23-page document costing anywhere from$200 to$600 when the application succeeded. Only 52 were rejected outright, leading to wonder as to whether this bureaucratic process is necessary. While the Ontario budget is a baby step in the right direction, NDP MPP Andrea Horwath proposed in a private bill, supported by Conservative Bob Runciman, to allow 100% access to locked-in funds. This would provide similar treatment to that available to many MLAs, who are given access to their occupational pension savings.

Some provinces have gone much further than Ontario to relieve pensioners from onerous rules after leaving their employer. Saskatchewan has been the most progressive province, providing for the full transfer of pension funds to RRSPs or RRIFs. Alberta and Manitoba allow pensioned workers to access 50% of their LIF funds, although Manitoba will soon be moving to full access. The only federal initiative so far in this regard is to unlock funds for federal employees at the age of 90 (we should all live that long!).
It is time to unlock the chains put on pension savings of employees who change jobs or retire. Doing so will help contribute to labour mobility, better retirement plans and, ultimately, a stronger economy.
- - -
- Jack M. Mintz is Professor of Business Economics, J. L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto, and Visiting Professor, New York University Law School.


© National Post 2007

 

[oldman]

Hi:
This is the press release that has just been sent out to papers across Ontario.. We also need Your support please sign the petition and write your MPP'S and the leaders etc. that are listed in the document below.

We have to let the Government know that we wont stand for the slap in the face that the government did to every Ontario Citizen by insulting us with a 25% unlock while the Government of Saskatchewan unlocked 100% for their citizens. Thank You for any support Bill Costello a Concerned citizen.




For Immediate Release

CARP’s 100% SOLUTION UNLOCKING LOCKED-IN FUNDS IN ONTARIO FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY
​

Toronto, Ontario March 23, 2007 – Ontario’s 2007 budget opened the door to unlocking Locked-In Funds (LIFs) by giving Ontarians the right of a one-time unlocking of up to 25% of locked-in funds no earlier than age 55 – but much more can and must be done. The many hundreds of thousands of Ontario LIF holders will accept no less!
CARP proposes that 50% of the principal in a LIF should be unlockable starting at age 55. With an additional 50% unlockable at age 65 – for a total of 100% for all Ontario LIF holders. The unlocked funds would be transferred into a RRIF.

Unlocking LIFs 100% is consistent with what was done in Saskatchewan five years ago and with what has been advanced in NDP MPP Andrea Horwath’s private member’s Bill 175.

A precedent was set in Ontario in 1999 by Bill 27 which allowed 61 MPPs to unlock 100% of their LIFs. It is absolutely unjust that this select group should enjoy a privilege that is denied to the multitude of other Ontario citizens with LIFs – and will continue to be denied if the Government’s discriminatory proposal is adopted. In fact, PC MPP Bob Runciman publicly endorsed Bill 175 because, as one of the select 61, he believes that all Ontarians with LIFs should have the same rights as he has.

In a recent article in the National Post, one of Canada’s leading tax experts, University of Toronto Professor Jack Mintz, stated, "workers who change jobs [or retire] get hobbled with inflexible locked-in accounts. It’s time to end this nanny-state paternalism."

Not only is the Government’s paternalism outdated, but so is its bureaucratic procedure whereby people have to fill out a 23-page application form to beg for access to their LIF principal and only if they can satisfactorily prove dire health or financial crises. If successful, they pay $200 to $600 to the Government for the favour.

Indeed, unlocking LIFs 100% will not cost the Ontario Government a single penny since LIFs are not government money. Rather it will save the government money by eliminating the need for bureaucrats to judge the LIF application forms – although this may be slightly offset by the loss of its bonus from successful applicants. However, it will raise more funds for the government through increased taxes from withdrawals as well as from sales taxes through increased consumption which, in turn, will stimulate Ontario’s economy. And, of course, CARP’s proposed policy will go a long way in enhancing the quality of life, well-being and self-respect of Ontario LIF holders.

LIF holders should express their support for CARP’s 100% solution to Premier McGuinty, Minister of Finance Greg Sobara, their local MPP and Opposition Leaders John Tory and Howard Hampton by going to www.carp.ca to use the

e-voice email system or by phone or mail.

CARP is Canada’s Association for the Fifty-Plus. A non-profit, non-partisan national organization with 400,000 members across the country, CARP’s mandate is to promote and protect the rights and quality of life for older Canadians. Its mission is to develop practical recommendations for the issues raised. CARP for the 50Plus Magazine is read by close to 1 million Canadians. The CARP websites receive 250,000 unique visits per month.

Contact:
Michelle Taylor
416 363-8748 ext. 236
m.taylor@50plus.com
www.carp.ca

NOTES:
The exact wording of the sentence in the 2007 Ontario Budget is: " the right to an optional one-time unlocking of up to 25% of locked-in funds no earlier than the early-retirement date under the pension plan from which the money was transferred (in most cases, this is age 55)."

In Ontario, when a pension plan is terminated or a person leaves a pension plan, the assets that the person has accumulated in the plan must be transferred to Locked-In Retirement Account (LIRA). The funds in a LIRA cannot be removed. However, once the qualifying age is reached, being either the earlier of the normal retirement date from which the funds originated or 55, those funds can then be transferred to a Locked-In Fund/Life Income Fund (LIF) or a Locked-In Retirement Income Fund [LRIF]) from which funds can be withdrawn annually in percentages mandated by provincial regulations for a LIF and for a LRIF.

Locked In Funds are also called Life Income Funds

 

[alexthegreat]

How to Unlock Federal Funds

I quit my company (federal)and transfered the funds to a LIF, the investment company paid me the Provincial amounts for 4 years, this year I got a big surprise when I opened my statement in January and found that the amount I had been receiving was wrong.
After contacting the investment compant I was told they made a mistake.
I have now started to research the PBSA 1985.

There are provisions in the regulations to unlock your funds

Shortened Life PBSA regs 20.2 (3)

Non Resident 183 Day Rule PBSA Regs. 28.4 & PBSA Update 26 item 8

for more information on my findings go to grundie.com/lif

 

[alexthegreat]

Federal or Provincial

Have you tried transferring the locked in pension to the Phillipines? I know in Canada you can transfer in locked-in retirement accounts from elsewhere. Maybe the Phillipines administrator will loosen the rules for you.

If your plan is under the Federal PBSA 1985 You can unlock if you are a non resident, see my site at grundie . com / lif

 

[alexthegreat]

Unlock Federal Funds

I have had no problems with buying and selling securities. As a non-resident I want to unlock everything and this is allowed by several Provinces. I still believe all of the Rules, etc. should be the same across the country. It would make it much easier on the Institutions and the holders to understand. The Federal Government should be a leader not a follower, as it is in this case. Some people have transfered from one Institution to another until they find one that mistakenly does what the person wants.

You can unlock your Federal Funds if your Pension is under PBSA 1985 Non Resident see my site at grundie.com/lif I have done a lot of researck on this issue

 

[oldman]

Anna's Letter in the Post


http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id=c74d46e3-5115-4098-8720-e2de80f523cf

Truly shackled


Financial Post

Published: Saturday, March 31, 2007

Re: Unlock LIRAs, Jack Mintz, March 27

Those having locked-in funds are truly shackled. At age 58, I can access merely 6% of my LIF fund. Those having RRSPs or group RRSPs can access their funds as life and need dictate. We take the risk in investing and should be able to access the proceeds, unfettered as in an RRSP.
Pension legislation, both provincially and particularly federally with regard to locked-in funds, must be radically changed. The 25% unlocking in the recent Ontario budget is totally unacceptable.

Ontarians should have their funds fully unlocked, 100%, as the MPPs in 1999 via Bill 27 generously unlocked theirs, to the exclusion of every other Ontario resident.
We are perfectly capable of managing our retirement income and don't need the nanny state to protect nor dictate to us. Pension legislation overall is outmoded, outdated and in need of a major overhaul.
Anna Pollock, Oakville, Ont.

 

[oldman]

Hi:

I am just letting everybody know that is interested. I have sent in the online petition to the Premier and Finance minister of Ontario. I also sent the petition to every MPP in Ontario plus 60 newspapers across the province.

I am still looking for more signatures at http://www.petitiononline.com/WRC101/petition.html

I will be sending it in again.

If you have a story to tell how the locking of these pensions affected you or you just want to send a message that you want these pensions unlocked.

You can put it in the online petition and I will make sure that every MPP & news paper Editor in Ontario See's it or You can mail it personally to the following people.

Ontario Liberals said it will unlock 25% in 2008 if they are still here.
We say that is not enough. When a person considers that Saskatchewan unlocked 100% for their people.

We need to let all party's know that we all want 100%. Nothing less.
This is all our own money . Not government money to keep themselves in perks.

Hon. Dalton McGuinty
dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org

Hon. Greg Sorbara
gsorbara.mpp@liberal.ola.org

Howard Hampton
hhampton-qp@ndp.on.ca

John Tory
john.tory@pc.ola.org

Robert W Runciman
bob.runciman@pc.ola.org

Thank You Bill Costello

 

[oldman]

Hi : This is a article printed in the Kitchener Waterloo Record .
PENSION PREDICAMENT
Locked-in pensions can block investors from accessing their own nest eggs
ROSE SIMONE

(Apr 21, 2007)
By the time Bill Nafziger retired after 37 years at Krug Inc. in Kitchener, he had a nice nest egg built up in his pension plan.
But three years later, at age 64, Nafziger, is fighting for the right to do what he wants with his own money.

The Milverton resident has joined CARP, also known as the Canada's Association for the 50-Plus, in lobbying the provincial government to give pensioners the right to withdraw money in what are commonly known as "locked-in" funds.
Locked-in pension funds are like regular RRSPs, but they are much more restrictive because they have maximums on how much money a person can withdraw.

With the principal in his defined contribution pension plan "locked in," Nafziger says he probably will die without being able to access the bulk of the pension money he worked for.
He adds that after he and his wife both die, whatever is left in the fund will to their estate and get taxed as revenue in one year, so the "tax man" will get a bigger bite of it.

"It's completely illogical," he says. "There is no reason why you shouldn't be able to unlock that money, and use it for yourself and your wife while you are living," Nafziger says.

No one knows how many people in Canada have money in locked-in accounts. The Financial Services Commission of Ontario, which is responsible for regulating pensions in this province, says it doesn't keep track of how many there are.

Jack Mintz, a University of Toronto business economics professor who himself has pension money in a locked-in fund from when he left Queens University, says it affects millions of people in Canada.

It includes people like Mintz who took their money out of a group pension plan when they went to work for another employer, as well as people like Nafziger who have individual pension plans rather than employer-administered group plans in which cheques are cut each month for retirees.

Under the financial services commission rules, if pension money isn't being managed by an employer pension fund, or by an insurance company that pays out a monthly income from a life annuity, it has to go into a "locked-in" account to provide a regular income over the years of retirement.

The amount a person can take out in each year after retirement is capped at a small percentage of what is in the fund. For example, at age 62, a person can take seven per cent of what's in the fund. That goes up gradually, to 11.9 per cent at age 79.

Nafziger says this means if he dies at around the age of 79, which is the age when the average Canadian man dies, two-thirds of his money would still be in the locked in fund.

As an industrial engineering manager at Krug, Nafziger tucked away more than $150,000 in his pension fund through personal and employer contributions over the years.

He knows he has to pay taxes on the money he takes out each year so he has no intention of withdrawing his entire retirement fund in one year.
But he says he should be able to enjoy more of the benefits of that money now that he is in a lower income tax bracket compared to when he worked for the office furniture manufacturer.

If the bulk of the money is left to his estate, governments will take a larger share of the funds in taxes, he says.

"If I die at the age of the average man in Ontario, there would still be about $100,000 left in that estate when it is unlocked," he says. "If I could take it out over the next 20 or 30 years in small amounts, I could realize a savings in income tax because I am taking it out at a lower income. But you are not allowed to take significant amounts all the way along."

CARP agrees with him. It is lobbying Ontario to follow the lead of Saskatchewan, which allows people to transfer all of their locked-in funds to registered retirement income funds that don't have maximum payout rules.

In its most recent budget, Ontario announced a provision, to take effect next year, that will allow for a "one time unlocking" of 25 per cent of the money in a locked-in fund.

Scott Blodgett, a spokesperson for the Ontario Ministry of Finance, says the government is trying to "balance the twin goals" of giving seniors more flexibility while still ensuring that there is a steady stream of income through retirement.

In doing that, Ontario will become one of four provinces that allows partial unlocking of funds, he says.

But Bill Gleberzon, a director of government relations for CARP, says that's not good enough. "Our position is that this is an insult," he says.

The government's rationale for not allowing full unlocking appears to be based on the fear that pensioners will be irresponsible and spend all the money in one year, he says.

But Gleberzon says there is no evidence people would do that, and there is a huge tax penalty if they do.

"This is just outmoded paternalism that should not exist in the 21st century," he says.

Retirees can apply to the financial services commission to unlock their money for health reasons or financial hardship. But people who have more than $17,480 in locked-in accounts also have to pay the commission a fee of $200 to $600 if they succeed.

"So they have to pay to access their own money," Gleberzon says.

About 30,000 people applied to unlock their money between 2003 and 2006, and only 52 were turned down, says Gleberzon. If almost everyone who applies is allowed to unlock anyway, why should people have to go through this costly bureaucratic process in the first place, he says.

Gleberzon says CARP will continue to lobby the provincial government and make locked in pensions an election issue if necessary. He says it is particularly galling to pensioners who are lobbying for unlocking that in 1999, the Mike Harris-led provincial government passed legislation that allowed 61 MPPs to unlock their pensions early and roll their money into RRSPs.

Gleberzon stresses that it is a matter of giving people access to their own money.

Nafziger agrees. "It's our money. It should be our decision what to do with it, not the government's decision."

rsimone@therecord.com

((((There needs to be a correction where it states)))) " But people who have (((more))) than $17,480 in locked-in accounts "

It should read.
Retirees can apply to the financial services commission to unlock their money for health reasons or financial hardship. But people who have (((less))) than $17,480. or do not have a income of more then $29,133. in locked-in accounts also have to pay the commission a fee of $200 to $600 if they succeed

 

[oldman]

Hi This is a letter sent to John Tory

Dear Mr. Tory,

My name is Grant Fleury. I am a resident of Sudbury.
I sent you a personal email back on Jan 17, 2007 and have not received
a reply or acknowledgement.

As indicated in that previous email, I have been lobbying the
provincial government to eliminate the locks from locked-in pensions
since 2004 when I discovered the limits to access of my own pension
money when I qualified to retire. I have since written articles in
local newspapers in Ontario and have been recently interviewed on the
CBC in the past few months regarding the unrealistic limits of the
current regulations of the PBA and of the discrimination of Bill 27 in
1999. Others in Ontario have also been working diligently to inform the
public of the truth and senseless arbitrary bureaucracy surrounding the
administration of locked-in pensions.

The recent announcement regarding amendments to the Pension Benefits
Act of Ontario by the Liberal government including a 25% unlocking
option, although positive steps in the right direction, do not go near
far enough to address the inequity of the two distinct classes of
citizens that were essentially created by the former Progressive
Conservative party.
As you are very well aware, Bill 27 (1999) and it's infamous
amendments, including the creation of a special exclusive group of 61
MPP's allowing a full transfer of the commuted value of their former
terminated "gold plated" pension plan to a group RRSP format bypassing
all the rules, regulations and limitations, continue to plague every
other ordinary Ontarian. Restrictions and limitations that continue to
restrict their ability to choose the level and style of retirement as
often dictated by conditions other than the "six conditions of
desperate hardship" amendments added in 2002 by the former ruling PC
party.

I agree that all pension ear-marked money should be off-limits until
the normal retirement age or 55 is reached, since it is intended for
retirement.

I agree that there may be a large number of people in the province that
do not have the financial knowledge to deal with their designated
pension assets. We have financial advisors for that purpose, just as we
have plumbers for plumbing and builders for building.

However, rather than assuming we are all inept in that area, unlike the
belief your previous PC party and the current Liberal party have of
themselves, you should adopt a positive approach of providing an
education for those that may stray instead of painting all Ontarians as
financially irresponsible. Maintaining such an attitude as this is
again shear arrogance on any level in any government.

I disagree, as supported by Statistics Canada, with the unrealistic age
of 90 used in calculating the yearly payment for these locked-in
pensions. The facts are simple - less than 1/2 of 1% live till 90. Life
expectancy is 77.2 years, not 90! Pick up any newspaper and read the
obituaries if there is any doubt.

I agree with the Saskatchewan government's lead to 100% unlock all
locked-in pensions for their residents in April of 2002 providing
retirees with more flexibility in managing their own financial affairs.
Your former PC party was ahead of their time in 1999 and had already
positively accomplished this with the grave exception that it was done
selfishly, exclusively and quietly, for all "members only" of the
legislature.

Moreover and more importantly, regardless of any of the above, and as a
direct result of the deceit and inequity of Bill 27, the basic
principle of equality for all Ontarians was broken!
This is why I, and all the other groups and organizations in Ontario,
such as CARP, are insisting on 100% equality and nothing less. If it's
good for 61, it's good for the estimated million others in Ontario who
have locked-in pensions in one form or another.
Every life is as important as the next, as is every law equally applied
for every citizen. The foundation of any true democracy is equality for
all members in it's society.
If that special deceitful exclusive provision for MPP's hadn't been
born in Bill 27, we would now be debating the merits of unlocking and
not the injustice of a misapplication of democracy, which would
probably lead us into other areas of discussing the pros and cons of
the unlocking issue.

But the reality is that "democracy" or lack thereof in this case, has
been broken and you, as party leader, and your members have inherited
this injustice.
It's now up to you to lead by example and show true leadership and
honour toward the people that you govern and re-apply that basic
principle of "EQUALITY' in our democratic society for which Ontario,
and Canada for that matter, were founded upon!

The 25% unlock amount, recently introduced, should be and could easily
be 100%. You and your party must come to terms with the simple and
missing notion of equality for all in a basic democracy where
discrimination amongst a people is totally unacceptable in every aspect
of it's application.
Condoning and upholding a paternalistic and arrogant attitude, with the
unwarranted belief that only 61 MPP's are capable of making sound
financial decisions and being the only ones to have that unique right
to manage their finances as they see fit, is an extremely disrespectful
position for you to assume to defend if you choose that route.

We, as parents and role models, are trying to teach our children about
equality and model that behaviour in our own daily lives within our
family unit. Previous generations, who worked much harder physically
with their hands, than we do today, had a much simpler way of life than
those of us experience today. I can't pick up a paper today without
finding some form of corruptive behaviour or deceit within one or more
levels of the people who govern us. Bill 27 was another stellar example
which was done purposely with intent to exclude and favour a select
few.
Seniors and retirees are astonished and outraged as they learn of this
deceitful act by the former PC party. Our forefathers escaped such
types corruption and severe arrogant control in their homeland to come
to Canada to start over with a clean slate and founded a great nation
based on the simple fundamentals of fairness and equality for all
citizens, regardless of origin.
Mr. Tory, you, being in and around my generation, no doubt were raised
with similar values as those used to create this great province and
nation.
You must do the right thing and make Ontario equal again.
I am fairly certain that you would never allow yourself to run your own
family in an undemocratic style where some would be privileged 0%, some
25% and some 100%. The honour and principles displayed in a family
should be the same type of honour and principles applied by governments
toward all it's constituents.

Bill 27 is a disgraceful slap in the face and an affront to basic
democracy in any society. You know it and so do I, along with every
Ontarian that has learned about this grave injustice created by the
previous Conservative government. The Liberal party with it's recent
budget announcement is continuing, albeit now at 75%, to insult and
disrespect the public by maintaining a paternalistic control of Ontario
retirees personal pension money.
Don't take my word for it, be honest and truthful and ask those around
you that know of Bill 27, what they think of this inequality and
injustice where two sets of rules govern certain individuals in our
province in extremely different ways regarding their same or similarly
commuted pensions.

You cannot, nor should not, ignore this inequity that was created by
your predecessors.
There cannot be any such thing as 25% or 50% or 75% more equal. Equal
is exactly what it means - 100% the same for everyone regardless of who
you are or your chosen vocation.

The former ruling Conservative party recognized the restrictive and
unrealistic paternalism of the PBA in 1999 and rightly so! As amazing
as this may sound, they in fact did the right thing to get as far away
from those regulations as they could as they all realized how
restrictive, insulting, and demeaning they were. The only HUGE mistake
they made was that they should have amended the act to include ALL
Ontarians thus upholding the basic principal of equality in our
province.

Mr. Runciman was more than well justified and showed true democratic
representation by standing up in support of Ms. Horwath's Bill 175 to
fully unlock locked-in pensions allowing all Ontarians the same 100%
unlock privilege that was afforded him and the other 60 members of the
legislature in 1999! This man truly realized the error of his previous
government and had the courage to come forward and admit a mistake.
This is an unbelievable accomplishment in light of the endless "blame
the other party" that more often than not pervades the legislature
during question period.

You sir have the unprecedented opportunity to correct the former
Conservative mistake and proudly own that accomplishment for yourself!

You will have the support of every locked-in pension holder in Ontario
at the upcoming election if you announce your guaranteed intention to
fully unlock and transfer locked-in pensions to an RRSP format at age
55 or the normal retirement date.
I assure you, as I continue my campaign to inform Ontarians of the
deceit and inequity of Bill 27 and the unrealistic and archaic
restrictions of the current rules and regulations of the PBA, there
will be hundreds of thousands of voters anxiously awaiting your
intentions regarding the locked-in issue by the time the election takes
place. The quality of retirement, and for those already living on the
edge, in their remaining years, are largely in your hands.

You and your Conservative party must now, in true and honourable
democratic fashion, insist on extending the privilege of those that
have benefited from the previous Conservative party's Bill 27 to
include the rest of all Ontarians in the application of that same 100%
unlock privilege that was afforded to those 61 MPP's of all
affiliations in 1999.

For our youth and children's sake, show them by example, how a true,
fair and equally applied democracy works.

Seniors and Retirees of Ontario, who were the builders of this great
province deserve the respect they've earned from this current
generation and all others to follow.
They deserve to live out the remaining years of their lives in a
dignified manner with the fruits of their labours in a manner of their
choosing and not that of a faceless beurarcracy.

They are watching and they are listening.

Mr. Tory, you have an enormous opportunity to show the people in
Ontario the true power of democracy by correcting a horrible selfish
act made by the former Conservative government by issuing a simple
unequivocal statement of full support. All without costing the taxpayer
a single dime!

Now that's a powerful gift sitting in the palm of your hand.


People Inform People
Time Tells All
Knowledge is Power

Sincerely,

Grant Fleury locked_pensions_gf@yahoo.ca
Sudbury

 

[oldman]

Hello All;
I just received this letter from Greg Sorbara in snail mail concerning the insulting 25% unlock.

Ministry of Finance Office of the Minister

April 27, 2007

Dear Mr. Costello:
Thank you for your correspondence forwarded by Premier Dalton McGuinty, regarding Ontario locked-in accounts.
In response to concerns and suggestions received from Ontarians regarding locked-in accounts, the government has committed in its 2007 Ontario Budget to introduce changes to the rules governing locked-in accounts, including the introduction of a new life income fund (LIF) that permits 25 per cent unlocking. The new, more flexible, LIF and other modifications to the rules for locked-in accounts would provide Ontario seniors enhanced access to their locked-in funds.
The new LIF would replace existing LIFs and locked-in retirement income funds (LRIFS) and introduce the right for LIF account holders to withdraw or transfer to a non-locked-in account up to 25 per cent of their locked-in funds. The new LIF would also eliminate existing mandatory annuity purchase requirements, permit withdrawal of the entire remaining account balance by age 90 and allow account holders to make LRIF-type withdrawals based on the investment earnings in the previous year where this amount exceeds the maximum income under the LIF schedule.
Additional changes to the rules governing locked-in accounts would permit unlocking for account holders who are non-residents of Canada for at least two years and direct transfers to non-locked-in accounts of small amounts unlocked in accordance with the existing provisions of the Pension Benefits Act.
In addition, consistent rules for the waiver of spousal entitlements to locked-in funds upon the death of the account holder would also be introduced.
Consultations with financial institutions and other key stakeholders on the 2007 Budget 1 proposals have been initiated to ensure that the introduction of new LIF and other changes to the rules for locked-in accounts may proceed smoothly.
Implantation of the 2007 Budget proposals is expected to begin in January of 2008
Thank you again for writing Yours sincerely Greg Sorbara Minister
c: The Honourable Dalton McGuinty

 

[oldman]

Hi;
I have been reading my online petition as I do every few days. Just to remind me why we need these funds unlocked.

NOBODY should have to go through this.

This is a article in my petition that helps me keep going after government to change this unjust legislation.

" Why is this government so cruel. They act like dictators. My mother was diagnosed with terminal cancer 5 years ago. My father and my mother wanted to go and travel as long as they could together and my father had a sizeable amount of money in a locked in pension and was already 68 years old The government would not allow him to take the money out . My mother then passed away two years later and had not been able to enjoy some of the things that they had saved the money for because of a unfeeling government. Now my father has passed away in the past year He also had no enjoyment from their savings . We his children did not want their money . We wanted them to be able to enjoy themselves. I am sure that thought never entered the governments mind . They would gladely take any money from my parents when they passed on. PlEASE people get rid of this uncaring government that is in power. The ones that have just unlocked the pensions a measly 23\% instead of letting the seniors have their money so they can live their retirement in the fashion they want Please vote for whichever government will unlock these pensions for your mother and fathers."

 

[oldman]

http://www.thestar.com/article/225446



Jun 14, 2007 12:52 PM
RITA TRICHUR
BUSINESS REPORTER

Two out of three Canadians expecting to retire in 2030 are failing to save enough money to cover basic household expenses in their golden years, says a new study released today by the Canadian Institute of Actuaries.

The report, “Planning For Retirement: Are Canadians Saving Enough?,” warns the greying baby boomer generation to either scramble to sharply increase their annual savings or plan to work past age 65 to avoid financial hardship.

"The message for most Canadians in their early to mid-40s is they will need to save more if they expect to enjoy an independent retirement," said the Institute's president, Normand Gendron.

"Governments need to provide Canadians with more education about the role that different savings vehicles can play in generating retirement income, and provide tools and incentives that encourage more households to save."

Canada’s public pension system is not intended to provide all the income needed for an independent retirement, the study said, noting it is only geared to replace about 40 per cent of gross income for households earning the average industrial wage, which was about $40,000 in 2005.

Canadians must act fast to build on this income through some combination of workplace pension plans, registered retirement savings plans, home equity and personal savings, it added.

In fact, actuaries determined a 40-year-old single person earning about $40,000 would need to save as much as 20 per cent, or $8,000, of his or her gross income every year for the next 25 years to cover necessary expenses in retirement. The study found that only a third of Canadian households are currently on track.

The study's findings stand in sharp contrast to a recent opinion poll by Pollara Inc. that found 55 per cent of Canadians aged 40 or older feel some level of confidence that they will have the financial resources to retire comfortably.

Those with retirement savings feel more confident, as do those with a workplace pension plan. Three out of four people surveyed said they plan to retire at or before age 65.

 

[oldman]

Our Reply to The Star

Dear Rita Trichur,

My name is Grant Fleury.
I am with the Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders, a
non-partisan group representing the interests of the estimated hundreds
of thousands of LIF Holders in Ontario. Our goal is to inform these
individuals of the current rules and regulations pertaining to their
locked-in funds and to thus lobby the government and political parties
to amend the current Ontario Pension legislation to allow 100% access
to locked-in pension funds at the earlier of either the normal
retirement date or age 55 and beyond as has been done in Saskatchewan
and to lesser and differing extents in other provinces in Canada.

I read your article with great interest as it certainly brings to light
the alarming reality of the incorrect perception of many
Canadians(Ontarians) of the belief they will have enough money to
comfortably retire on.

As you have duly noted from the report of the Canadian Institute of
Actuaries that there, in fact, is not enough money being set aside by
two-thirds of Canadians for their retirement years, there remains
another less written about subject that further compounds the dismal
financial reality of these future retirees.

Many of the people that were surveyed, no doubt, are in possession of
one or more forms of a locked-in fund known as either a LIRA, LIF or
LRIF, depending at what stage those monies are at in their transition
towards actual available dollars to the pensioner. Working to or past
65 will be, for most, the only option available in order to achieve
retirement independence if any of these type of locked-in funds are in
their retirement portfolio.

The reason I say this is simply due to the fact that although a
significant amount of people are in possession of these locked-in
accounts known as LIRA's, LIF's or LRIF's, most are unaware of the
highly restrictive rules and regulations they will face when they
expect to begin withdrawing from these accounts to supplement or
primarily fund their retirement years.

The message by institute president Normand Gendron "The message for
most Canadians in their early to mid-forties is they will need to save
more if they expect to enjoy an independent retirement," could and
should be amended to include or address the locked-in type of
retirement savings as a principle reason for having to work longer or
begin to save earlier and that those people who have LIRA's, LIF's or
LRIF's should be aware that they will be limited to a yearly access of
approx. 6.5% for LIF's or the market growth for LRIF's and thus had
better include this extreme limitation in their overall calculations to
toward their ultimate goal of financial independence upon retirement.

This information, or lack thereof, regarding LIRA's, LIF's or LRIF's is
grossly lacking in the general public and quite often is also not fully
understood by financial consultants or institutions' agents. Thus
owners of these type of locked-in accounts, more often than not, think
that when they reach fifty-five (55), they will have full unrestricted
access to their locked-in pension funds. They are shocked and outraged
when informed of these limitations as nothing could be further from
their perception than the archaic limits imposed by the regulators of
locked-in funds in Ontario.

Hence the statement "There is a gap between what Canadians are thinking
and what they are actually planning and saving." is in fact much larger
than the report suggests if some of these pension funds are of the
locked-in variety.

The statement "The problem is that boomers have neglected to save", is
not entirely the fault of the boomer. The real underlying problem is
the lack of disclosure by the large corporations and financial
institutions who have laid these people off over the last thirty or so
years, and failed to accurately inform them of the fallacy that the
settlements they receive in the form of locked-in funds are not as
useful as they are portrayed to be. Yes, they may seem large at the
time, but they are legislated to be doled out, at a non-linear rate,
over a period from 55 to 90 years of age where in fact the majority of
this money will never be fully accessible to the fund owner as less
than 1/2 of 1 percent of us will live to 90 anyway! The remaining
money, upon death, is immediately taxed at the beneficiary's taxation
rate since it is added to their taxable income for the year and heavily
taxed at a much higher rate. This more often than not repeated scenario
essentially results in a "worthless bag of cash" to the pensioner since
they will likely never see the bulk of their own money while alive and
a large and immediate tax grab for the government..

Unless the existing pension legislation is changed in Ontario, and
Canada for that matter, Canada's public pension system will be relied
on even further to supplement the shortfall of future retirees with
locked-in pension funds as a result of their paltry access.

"The government will provide you with a base support system that will
keep you just above the poverty line – but that's all," said Robert
Brown, an actuarial science professor at the University of Waterloo,
who worked on the study.

This is precisely one of the principle reasons why we, the Ontario
Coalition of Independent LIF Holders, are advocating the abolition of
the restrictions regarding the limits to access of these locked-in
funds and thus allow the owners full 100% access to their funds upon
reaching the qualified age. In conjunction with CARP, and a number of
other well known and highly regarded and respected individuals in the
field of economics, we are currently and vigourously pursuing the
political parties, including the current Liberal party, to remove these
restrictive limits and provide full access as was done for all
residents in Saskatchewan a few years ago and was also done exclusively
for 61 MPP's in Ontario in 1999 via a special discriminatory amendment
for sitting members of the legislature contained in Bill 27(1999). We,
the remaining Ontarians, are insisting on equal and fair treatment as
was afforded the 61 MPP's in 1999 when they exclusively legislated
themselves a 100% unlocking privilege when their pension plans were
also previously wound up and they too were subsequently left with
similar locked-in pension plans.

All of the findings that you have pointed out in your article are in
fact worse than they appear to be on the surface if some of the pension
ear-marked money is of the locked-in variety.

As I've stated earlier, most people surveyed by our group, are unaware
of the restrictions to access they will face when they begin to
withdraw and are shocked when they are referred to the FSCO and the PBA
in Ontario to determine these extremely low percentages for withdrawal
rates and restrictions that they are being limited to.

The statement, "According to Statistics Canada, about 9.4 million
households had some form of pension assets in 2005." again is important
to note that depending on which type of pension fund or account that an
individual owns will largely change the number of years each person
will have to either start to save earlier or work later to in order to
achieve that comfortable level of retirement that most of us are saving
for.

Defined contribution type pension plans are a way for companies to not
only slash costs but to put the onus on the individual to manage their
own retirement with the companies defined monthly contribution to their
employees pension regardless of the strength or performance of that
employee's respective company.

In addition to the statement, "The study also recommended that Ottawa
consider making interest paid on residential mortgages tax deductible,
as it is in the U.S., given the high percentage of Canadians who may
need some portion of their home's equity to provide adequate retirement
income.", there should also be a recommendation to eliminate the locks
on all locked-in pensions upon the qualified retirement date and thus
provide the entire population a greater access to their own retirement
money thereby allowing them the flexibility to greater managerial
control over their entire pension strategy and subsequent level of
financial independence.

Sincerely,

Grant Fleury,
Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders

 

[Unforgiven]

I found this to be quite an interesting read. Upon investigation, I found that we have one of these pensions from an old employer for about 10,000. It seems that when she left that firm and moved to her current one, we were given the forms and looked them over, but I was under the impression that locked in meant something much different than you have shown here.

Count me in with those who want this changed. How ridiculous this is in that if you manage to save and put away money all your life so that you are comfortable when you retire, you will be considered too stupid to manage it.

 

[oldman]

Hi All; This may be interesting to many of you.

Bill Costello The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders.

For Immediate Release
July 5, 2007​

TORY SAYS ONTARIO SENIORS DESERVE PENSION FAIRNESS
PC plan will increase fairness, give seniors full access to locked-in pensions​

(London, ON) – Progressive Conservative Party Leader John Tory today said a PC Government will unlock pensions for seniors and retirees so they can access and manage their own money as they see fit.

“Ontario’s seniors and retirees built the foundation for the strong Ontario we know today. They deserve to have control over their hard-earned retirement savings,” said Tory. “I’ve heard from seniors and retirees across the province that the rules are too restrictive. We believe that Ontarians know best how to look after their money– not government.”

Tory met with and listened to the concerns of local seniors today in Southwestern Ontario. As part of the PC ‘Leadership Matters’ plan to provide fairness to Ontarians, Tory said a PC Government will give Ontarians 100 per cent access to their locked-in pension income. This would mean seniors and retirees would have access to 50 per cent of their pension at age 55 and the remaining 50 per cent at age 65. In Dalton McGuinty’s Ontario, pensions are locked-in by the government as late as age 90 and the most any senior can hope to access from their pension savings is one out of every four dollars.

“Our plan will allow Ontario seniors and retirees to have control over their own money and better plan for retirement based on their own needs,” said Tory. “Ontario’s pension regulations present unnecessary challenges for seniors and retirees looking to transform a lifetime of hard work into financial freedom.”

Tory added, “This is a simple change to Ontario’s pension rules with no cost to the taxpayer. Unlike Dalton McGuinty, who is only willing to provide seniors and retirees with partial access to their locked in pension funds, a John Tory PC Government will respect the wishes of these individuals to manage their money as they see fit.”

In the 2007 Budget, Dalton McGuinty responded to seniors and retirees concerns about this issue by proposing a plan that would give Ontarians access to 25 per cent of locked-in accounts at the earliest retirement date of the pension plan from which the money was transferred and 100 per cent access at age 90. To date, no regulations or legislation have been brought forward to enact these proposed changes.

During his remarks, Tory cited comments made in March 2007 by Dr. Jack Mintz of the University of Toronto calling for Ontario to unlock the chains put on pension savings of employees who change jobs or retire. According to Mintz, unlocking locked-in pensions would help contribute to labour mobility, better retirement plans and ultimately, a stronger economy.

“Leadership is about listening to seniors and retirees. If we are going to remove the barriers and give Ontarians the fairness and peace of mind they deserve, then leadership matters,” said Tory.
For more information:
Michelle Pennell
(416) 325-9109

 

[oldman]

Backgrounder - Fairness for You and Your Family - Unlocking Locked-in Pensions​

Fairness is a basic value for Ontarians - one that has many dimensions.
Fairness means an Ontario that rewards hard work, entrepreneurship and innovation, respecting taxpayers and giving everyone a chance to participate in the province’s prosperity.
Fairness also means giving Ontarians control over their hard-earned retirement savings.
John Tory believes individuals know how to manage their own money better than the government.
That’s why a John Tory PC Government will give Ontario’s retirees 100 per cent access to their locked-in pension income - 50 per cent at age 55 and the remaining 50 per cent at age 65 - which under current rules are locked-in by the government until age 90.

What is a Locked-in Pension?

• · When individuals leave a company that provides a defined benefit or defined contribution pension plan, they may have the option of leaving their portion of the pension in the company plan or rolling it into a Locked-In Retirement Account (LIRA).
  · At age 55 or the normal retirement date of the commuted pension plan (whichever is earlier) individuals may transfer their LIRA into a Life Income Fund (LIF) or Locked-in Retirement Income Fund (LRIF).
  · LIRAs, LIFs and LRIFs are regulated independently by each province and territory and the federal government for federally regulated industries.

Locking-in Rules in Ontario

• · Locking-in rules prevent individuals from increasing their retirement income in any one year beyond the annual withdrawal limits for LIFs and LRIFs. LIRAs do not allow any withdrawals.
  · LIF/LIRA/LRIF-holders cannot access additional principal in their locked-in accounts unless they can demonstrate to the Government that they are in dire financial or health circumstances.
  · By age 71, LIRAs must be transferred into a LIF or LRIF, or used to purchase a life annuity.
  · By age 80, LIFs must be transferred into an LRIF or used to purchase a life annuity.
  · At age 90, individuals are finally able to withdraw the remaining principal in their LRIF.

The Liberal Response

• · Dalton McGuinty inadequately responded to Ontarians’ concerns in the 2007 Budget by proposing access to 25 per cent of locked-in accounts at the earliest retirement date of the pension plan from which the money was transferred and 100 per cent access at age 90.
  · These changes have not yet been made to the appropriate regulations or legislation.

Unlocking in Other Jurisdictions

• · Alberta (50% at age 50), Saskatchewan (100% at age 55), Manitoba (50% at age 55) and New Brunswick (25% at any age) have already changed their laws to enable older adults to access some, or all, of their locked-in pension.
  

 

[oldman]

Press Release from CARP & The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders

Good News for Ontarians:
Enlightened policy promises to unlock Life Income Funds 100%.

Toronto, July 5, 2007 – CARP and the Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF-Holders applaud PC leader John Tory’s announcement today that, if elected, a PC government will allow Ontarians to unlock 100% of their Life Income Funds (LIFs) – half at age 55 and the full amount at age 65. We fully support this progressive policy that will bring Ontario into the 21st century. The PC Party heard us and its decision represents another milestone in our alliance’s campaign to have LIFs unlocked 100% in Ontario. Mr. Tory’s pledge propels the momentum to unshackle LIF-holders begun with NDP MPP Andrea Horwath‘s Bill to unlock LIFs 100% which was introduced in the Ontario Legislature in December 2006, in conjunction with CARP and the Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF-Holders.

When individuals retire/leave a job which has a registered corporate or occupational pension, the terms of the pension plan may allow them to transfer their portion of the pension into a Locked In Retirement Account (LIRA) and subsequently a LIF. However 100% unlimited access to the principal in the LIF is denied to the LIF holders as it is locked-in for life or to age 90.

Like savings in any registered pensions, LIFs or LIRAs are the individual’s money, made up of their contributions plus those of the company or occupation as deferred salary. It is not government money.

A LIF has a mandated maximum yearly withdrawal limit unlike a RRIF which has none. This ensures that the average Ontario male cannot access about two thirds of his LIF until death (average male 79 and female 84) at which moment the LIF is completely unlocked for their spouse. It also means that most of us will not live to 90 at which age all of our LIF can be unlocked.
However, additional access to the retirees’ LIF money in Ontario may be available by submitting a lengthy request form to the Financial Service Commission of Ontario (FSCO). This bureaucratic agency requires a payment of $200 to $600 from successful applicants in order to access their own money. Their appeal may be granted only if the applicant can prove dire health or financial circumstances.
The precedent to unlock LIFs was established in Ontario in 1999 when 61 MPPs were given the right to unlock their occupational pension 100%. Not only did they give themselves a privilege which they denied to all other Ontarians with LIFs but their action cost Ontario taxpayers $10 million because they miscalculated the amount they could put into their individual RRSPs.
- 2 -

For more information on LIFs, the campaign by CARP and its allies to have direct access to 100% of the principal in a LIF without paternalistic government control – go to www.carp.ca.
To sign a petition to the Ontario government on unlocking LIFs 100%, go to http://www.petitiononline.com/WRC101/petition.html
A non-partisan organization, CARP is Canada’s Association for the Fifty-Plus with 250,000 members in Ontario and 400,000 members across the country. Our mandate is to protect the rights and quality of life for older Canadians. Our mission is to provide practical recommendations for the issues we raise.
The goal of the Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF-Holders is to influence the Ontario government to unlock LIFs 100%.

- 30 -

For more information and interviews, please contact:
For CARP, Canada’s Association For the Fifty-Plus:

Bill Gleberzon - Director of Government Relations, 416-363-8748 ext. 230/ 1-800-363-9736 ext. 230 e-mail: w.gleberzon@50plus.com

For The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF-Holders:
Bill Nafziger - spokesperson, 519-595-8161 e:mail:nafjbg@perth.net
Grant Fleury - spokesperson, 705-566-6924e:mail: gjfleury@sympatico.ca