Email
PrintMPs’ pension plan on hook for $804-million, says new report
The day after Finance Minister Jim Flaherty promised to find $4-billion in cuts to federal programs over the next year, the government quietly tabled a report in Parliament that shows taxpayers are now paying $5.50 for every $1 that MPs and Senators contribute to the gold-plated pension plan for Parliamentarians.
PARLIAMENT HILL—The day after Finance Minister Jim Flaherty promised to find $4-billion in cuts to federal programs over the next year, the government quietly tabled a report in Parliament that shows taxpayers are now paying $5.50 for every $1 that MPs and Senators contribute to the pension plan for Parliamentarians.
After some outrage following the May 2 election over lucrative pensions former Cabinet ministers and MPs received as they walked off into the sunset, the report on the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act indicated the plan is now on the hook for $804-million in payable benefits for past MPs who are collecting, MPs and Senators in the current Parliament and those who are gone but not yet eligible to collect benefits at age 55.
The plan will pay an estimated $111.5-million in benefits, on top of $4.3-million in severance cheques to the 113 MPs who either retired prior to the May 2 election or who were defeated.
The report shows that for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, taxpayers contributed a total of $24.8-million into the retirement plan, compared to $4.50-million from MPs and Senators. Pension payouts for all retired MPs and Senators or their survivors totalled $48.8-million during that fiscal year.
More so than after any previous election, the exodus of MPs from Ottawa for this election, primarily due to the NDP sweep of Bloc Québécois and Liberal seats in Quebec, as well as a Conservative sweep of Liberal seats in the GTA and other areas in Ontario, anger at the generous pension payouts rose after the election dust settled.
Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe, who pointedly declared his commitment to Quebec sovereignty during the English and French television debates, left for a new life in Quebec with a pension that the Canadian Taxpayers Federation estimated at $140,765 a year, before taxes. Former Conservative MP Jay Hill, who retired late last year after entering Parliament in 1993 on the Reform Party rallying cry against the gold-plated plan, left with estimated $100,000 annual pension, before taxes. Liberal John Cannis, who lost his Scarborough-Centre, Ont., riding to the Conservatives and who never made it into Cabinet during 18 years in Parliament, received a pension of $97,902, indexed to cover inflation like all the pensions.
Despite the contrast between the cushy landing for MPs and the government’s plan to cut thousands of federal public service jobs over the next four years, as well as programs that serve the public, MPs yesterday rejected any suggestion Parliament should again review the generous pay and pension plans for MPs and senators.
“Certainly, for a politician there is no percentage in getting into this kind of stuff,” Conservative MP Leon Benoit (Vegreville-Wainwright, Alta.) told The Hill Times. “Politically, it’s not the kind of thing that moves our agenda ahead in any way, it’s a distraction, quite frankly, to get into anything like that.”
Mr. Benoit said the post-election controversy over the plan was generated by the news media, and he had no complaints from voters in his riding. “I never heard about that in my constituency,” said Mr. Benoit, also elected for the first time as a Reform MP in 1993.
Liberal and NDP MPs were also against the idea of taking a second look at the plan, which allows MPs and Senators to skirt Canada Revenue rules to avoid limits on the maximum percentage of annual income that can eventually be paid out as a pension.
“Obviously what happens in Parliament is a lightning rod, because people are angry and frustrated,” said NDP MP Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ont.) “I didn’t even know if there is a pension when I ran. If I lose my job, I’ll get about $27,000 a year. Is it fair? It was in place when I came here, I didn’t have a say in it. Every time I mention pensions it’s going to get me abused at Tim Hortons, but hey, you know, people are going to be upset about something.”
Liberal Wayne Easter (Malpeque, P.E.I), elected to the House of Commons for the first time in 1993, dismissed the notion that the system should be reviewed.
“Not at all,” he told The Hill Times. “I think we continually, and I’ve seen that happen since my time here, we continually compromise on the benefits for MPs, and I think that’s the wrong approach to go. I don’t think we should be continually taking everything down to the lowest common denominator.”
“What we should be doing instead is ensuring there are pension plans for workers with companies in the private sector,” Mr. Easter said. “The right approach is to say we have to improve everyone’s pensions in the country.”
For the 12 months the report covered, 503 former MPs and Senators were collecting the pension benefits, with 117 of them receiving more than $70,000 a year. The average annual pension was $56,512 for former Senators, who had served longer without the bother of elections, and $53,586 for former MPs. The plan was also providing pension benefits to 156 family survivors of deceased former MPs and Senators.
The Hill Times
- 1
MPs’ pension plan on hook for $804-million, says new report
The day after Finance Minister Jim Flaherty promised to find $4-billion in cuts to federal programs over the next year, the government quietly tabled a report in Parliament that shows taxpayers are now paying $5.50 for every $1 that MPs and Senators contribute to the gold-plated pension plan for Parliamentarians.
PARLIAMENT HILL—The day after Finance Minister Jim Flaherty promised to find $4-billion in cuts to federal programs over the next year, the government quietly tabled a report in Parliament that shows taxpayers are now paying $5.50 for every $1 that MPs and Senators contribute to the pension plan for Parliamentarians.
After some outrage following the May 2 election over lucrative pensions former Cabinet ministers and MPs received as they walked off into the sunset, the report on the Members of Parliament Retiring Allowances Act indicated the plan is now on the hook for $804-million in payable benefits for past MPs who are collecting, MPs and Senators in the current Parliament and those who are gone but not yet eligible to collect benefits at age 55.
The plan will pay an estimated $111.5-million in benefits, on top of $4.3-million in severance cheques to the 113 MPs who either retired prior to the May 2 election or who were defeated.
The report shows that for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2010, taxpayers contributed a total of $24.8-million into the retirement plan, compared to $4.50-million from MPs and Senators. Pension payouts for all retired MPs and Senators or their survivors totalled $48.8-million during that fiscal year.
More so than after any previous election, the exodus of MPs from Ottawa for this election, primarily due to the NDP sweep of Bloc Québécois and Liberal seats in Quebec, as well as a Conservative sweep of Liberal seats in the GTA and other areas in Ontario, anger at the generous pension payouts rose after the election dust settled.
Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe, who pointedly declared his commitment to Quebec sovereignty during the English and French television debates, left for a new life in Quebec with a pension that the Canadian Taxpayers Federation estimated at $140,765 a year, before taxes. Former Conservative MP Jay Hill, who retired late last year after entering Parliament in 1993 on the Reform Party rallying cry against the gold-plated plan, left with estimated $100,000 annual pension, before taxes. Liberal John Cannis, who lost his Scarborough-Centre, Ont., riding to the Conservatives and who never made it into Cabinet during 18 years in Parliament, received a pension of $97,902, indexed to cover inflation like all the pensions.
Despite the contrast between the cushy landing for MPs and the government’s plan to cut thousands of federal public service jobs over the next four years, as well as programs that serve the public, MPs yesterday rejected any suggestion Parliament should again review the generous pay and pension plans for MPs and senators.
“Certainly, for a politician there is no percentage in getting into this kind of stuff,” Conservative MP Leon Benoit (Vegreville-Wainwright, Alta.) told The Hill Times. “Politically, it’s not the kind of thing that moves our agenda ahead in any way, it’s a distraction, quite frankly, to get into anything like that.”
Mr. Benoit said the post-election controversy over the plan was generated by the news media, and he had no complaints from voters in his riding. “I never heard about that in my constituency,” said Mr. Benoit, also elected for the first time as a Reform MP in 1993.
Liberal and NDP MPs were also against the idea of taking a second look at the plan, which allows MPs and Senators to skirt Canada Revenue rules to avoid limits on the maximum percentage of annual income that can eventually be paid out as a pension.
“Obviously what happens in Parliament is a lightning rod, because people are angry and frustrated,” said NDP MP Charlie Angus (Timmins-James Bay, Ont.) “I didn’t even know if there is a pension when I ran. If I lose my job, I’ll get about $27,000 a year. Is it fair? It was in place when I came here, I didn’t have a say in it. Every time I mention pensions it’s going to get me abused at Tim Hortons, but hey, you know, people are going to be upset about something.”
Liberal Wayne Easter (Malpeque, P.E.I), elected to the House of Commons for the first time in 1993, dismissed the notion that the system should be reviewed.
“Not at all,” he told The Hill Times. “I think we continually, and I’ve seen that happen since my time here, we continually compromise on the benefits for MPs, and I think that’s the wrong approach to go. I don’t think we should be continually taking everything down to the lowest common denominator.”
“What we should be doing instead is ensuring there are pension plans for workers with companies in the private sector,” Mr. Easter said. “The right approach is to say we have to improve everyone’s pensions in the country.”
For the 12 months the report covered, 503 former MPs and Senators were collecting the pension benefits, with 117 of them receiving more than $70,000 a year. The average annual pension was $56,512 for former Senators, who had served longer without the bother of elections, and $53,586 for former MPs. The plan was also providing pension benefits to 156 family survivors of deceased former MPs and Senators.
The Hill Times
 Newsletter |  Facebook |  Twitter |  RSS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
