Seniors and Pensions

Op-ed by Chris Charlton originally appeared in the Hamilton Mountain News

By CHRIS CHARLTON

Nov 13, 2009

Large Medium Small Print This Article Tell a friend Whenever my schedule permits, I knock on doors on the Mountain to ask which issues residents would like me to raise on their behalf in the House of Commons. For the last year, no issue has come up as often as the security of workplace pensions and the fear of not having enough money to survive retirement.

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, CPP Investment Board members lost a staggering $24 billion, wiping out four years of CPP contributions. They will get millions in bonuses, while retirees will get on average a mere $500 a month. This is an unethical abuse of power.

What is the response from the government? A letter from the minister, asking them to respect a vague set of G20 rules. That simply is not good enough.

Will the minister finally find the courage to do the right thing and demand that the executives pay back these outrageous bonuses?

Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be participating in this evening’s debate on motion M-300 which calls on the government to enhance access to, and the level of, GIS benefits for Canada’s poorest seniors.

Let me say at the outset that I fully support this motion.

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, in its budget bill, the government launched an attack on pay equity, environmental assessments and the collective bargaining rights of public sector workers, including wage rollbacks to the RCMP and the Canadian Forces.

It now appears that workers at General Motors are next in the line of attack. GM is describing its pension liabilities as crippling but the Minister of Industry is refusing to protect workers and the pensions they have worked so hard to build.

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I am very pleased to have a second opportunity to respond to the budgetary policies of the Conservative government.

From the Senior Times

Chris Charlton, NDP critic for Seniors and Pensions, went after the Tories during Question Period June 4 over their promotion of pension splitting for seniors as a way to increase after-tax income.

“I don’t think they ever really thought this program through,” she says, citing one example of a couple who saved $2000 on their taxes by pension splitting, but ended up paying $5400 more for one spouse’s nursing home care as a result of the adjustment in their disposable income.

This scenario is, according to Charlton, not uncommon, and costly to redress. “To add insult to injury, they’re being made to pay a 5% penalty to re-file for an adjustment to their return. I’m asking the government, at a minimum, to waive the penalty, since seniors can’t afford accountants to save them from the government’s false advertising.”

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, the government's much touted pension-splitting scheme is backfiring badly. A couple in my riding saved $2,000 on their income taxes, but as a result they had to pay $5,400 more. One requires nursing home care. Another will lose her GIS.

Seniors cannot afford high-priced accountants to save them from the government's false advertising and now they have to pay a penalty if they want to reverse the pension-splitting on their tax returns.

Will the government do the right thing and waive that penalty today for the 2007 tax year? Will it at least do that?

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to be participating in this morning's debate on Bill C-490, An Act to amend the Old Age Security Act (application for supplement, retroactive payments and other amendments) on behalf of the NDP caucus and as the critic for seniors and pensions.

Let me say at the outset that I fully support this bill. In many ways it is the companion piece to my own bill, Bill C-336. Whereas my bill seeks to enhance the ability of pensioners to access their CPP benefits retroactively, the bill before us today deals specifically with the guaranteed income supplement. Both are fundamentally about fairness for seniors and both are long overdue in their adoption.

Ms. Chris Charlton (Hamilton Mountain, NDP):

Mr. Speaker, I am delighted to participate in tonight's debate on Bill C-445 as the NDP critic for seniors and pensions.

Let me begin by thanking the member for Richmond—Arthabaska for bringing this bill forward. For those who may have just tuned into the debate, let me just take a moment to remind the television viewers what we are debating.

Bill C-445 would grant a refundable tax credit equal to 22% of the reduction in pension benefits experienced by beneficiaries of registered pension plans, other than trusts, who suffer a loss of pension benefits, normally when their pension plans are wound up in whole or in part. It applies both to defined benefit plans and defined contribution plans.

From the Hamilton Spectator

By Tom Cooper

Ahh April: Melting snow, spring showers, tax time. It's funny how all the imagery this month revolves around us getting soaked in one way or another.

A quick peek at the calendar reveals a procrastinator's dread -- there's now just two weeks left until the deadline for filing income tax returns.

The government certainly won't let us forget that it is time to pay the piper. Of course, when it is the other way around and they owe us money, government departments often aren't quite as forthcoming with information.

Thousands of individuals and families never find out about legitimate benefits for which they could qualify. It's not like there is a concerted effort to withhold information, but the senior levels of government often times don't actively publicize the income supports that might be available.