Canada -   

1
Finance Minister Jim Flaherty speaks at FEI Canada's annual conference in Victoria, B.C., Friday June 11, 2010. Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan appears on CTV's Power Play from Windsor, Ont. on Friday, June 11, 2010.

Flaherty eyes CPP expansion, pension changes

Viewer

CTV News Video

CTV National News: Daniele Hamamdjian reports
Pension reform is two words Canadians will have to get use to hearing. Federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty says Canadians haven't put enough aside, so the solution is not going to come without a price.
Power Play: Dwight Duncan, finance minister
Ontario's Finance Minister says in the next 20 years a significant number of Canadians will not have a sufficient amount of retirement income and the burden of that will fall on the tax payers.
Power Play: Panel of MPs on the changes to CPP
The Liberal finance critic says the changes to CPP are baby steps in the right direction but more needs to be done to the supplementary Canadian Pension Plan. An NDP critic says many people are moving to the private RSP market due to the lack of change.
CTV News Channel: Jeff Schwartz, financial expert
The executive director for Consolidated Credit Couseling Services of Canada explains why it is important to put money aside for retirement now that interest rates are low, but not to put your savings at risk.
Canada AM: BNN's Michael Kane on the markets
Provincial finance ministers are meeting in PEI this weekend, and federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty will be there to discuss reforming the federal pension plan.

A A |  Email ThisEmail  | PrintComments (28) Facebook   

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty speaks at FEI Canada's annual conference in Victoria, B.C., Friday June 11, 2010. Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan appears on CTV's Power Play from Windsor, Ont. on Friday, June 11, 2010.

Photos

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty speaks at FEI Canada's annual conference in Victoria, B.C., Friday June 11, 2010.

View Larger Image

Date: Fri. Jun. 11 2010 9:44 PM ET

Finance Minister Jim Flaherty is eyeing an expansion of the Canada Pension Plan, which would be accompanied by new rules allowing financial institutions to offer pensions to Canadians who lack coverage.

In a recent letter to provincial finance ministers, Flaherty explained his position on a possible expansion of the CPP.

"I believe that we should consider a modest, phased-in and fully funded enhancement to defined benefits under the Canada Pension Plan in order to increase savings adequacy in future," Flaherty said in his letter, which was sent out Thursday.

The overall strategy would be to increase CPP benefits while making changes to pension regulations that would allow banks and insurance companies to provide affordable pensions to all types of employees and employers, as well as the self-employed.

The finance minister said such changes "will help enhance retirement savings and pension coverage, without compromising our current system and without passing costs on to future generations."

Flaherty's hybrid, public-private solution is highly similar to the position of Ontario Finance Minister Dwight Duncan, who put out a letter of his own to Canada's finance ministers on Thursday.

Duncan believes that a two-pronged approach -- of bumping up the CPP and creating pension opportunities for more Canadians -- could be the key to building a national consensus on pension reform in the near future.

Both Flaherty and Duncan have rejected calls from unions and NDP members to double CPP benefits. Instead they want to see only modest increases to CPP contributions and payouts.

They also both fear that Canadians are not saving enough for their retirement -- a problem that has worsened in the wake of the recession that wiped out large swaths of private investments.

On Friday, the Liberal party issued a press release calling on the federal government to create a supplementary pension fund that would operate in addition to the CPP, which Canadians would join on a voluntary basis.

Pointing to a recent TD report that also favoured a supplemental pension fund, the Liberals said it was "a low-cost way of reducing the three-quarters of private sector workers who have no registered retirement savings."

Next week, Flaherty will attend a meeting of provincial and territorial finance ministers in Prince Edward Island. Pension proposals will be one of the hot topics at the meeting.

Flaherty has taken part in months of consultations with industry and members of the public, as Ottawa tries to strengthen the country's existing pension system.

With files from The Canadian Press

Comments are now closed for this story

Linda in Vancouver
said

For all the griping and bickering on here you would think Canada is in bad shape with it's savings and investment programs.When,in fact, the OECD gioves Canada very high praise for it's pensions, RRPS's, and TFSA's. In fact,one of the best in the world.While acknowledging that we do have poverty among seniors ,our rates are much lower than in most other nations. We are spoiled rotten in Canada.Living far beyond our means,and living lives in which we expect to get everything for nothing, or as close to nothing as possible. And we also have this union based assumption tha socialism is the way to even things out. Unions believe that everyone should make about the same amount of money because they all shop in the same stores. I this area they are now proposing that the person who pours your coffee should make $18 per hour fo that. No education. No work related expenses such as tools, equipment, or expensive schooling. Just more money. I feel for the people that Saskmike talks about.But the answer to earning more money is not found by getting someone else's earnings. It is found by improving yourself,and the skills you offer your employer. If the $10 cashier wants to earn the same wage as a mechanic,learn something, buy the tools,and do the same job. While evaluating the real worth of the work you do can be a bit subjective,over all,every job has a value .Paying more than the job is worth is a sure path to bankrupcy, which means you can't even pay $10 any more. If you want to earn $25 per hour, you have to learn something that is worth $25. There is nothing unfair about that,what-so-ever. PERIOD


Martin
said

I can't believe anyone seriously considers bank managed pension plans to be superior to government. Please raise your hands all of you who have barely broken even in your RSP investments, while paying nice MERs to the bankers and being told how smart it is (and not even keeping up to the real 8% inflation). This smacks of the Bush/Republican drive to privatize Social Security in the US - it mainly shows that the Cons are palsy walsy with the banks. It is also a back door tax grab, since it would let the government off the hook for an essential service.


Chuck
said

In response to "Flaherty is an idiot" one wonders who is the idiot. Taxes have been reduced by the present government in comparison to the previous and the Liberals are out to increase taxes again if they form the government. Smarten up idiot.


Doug # BC
said

THis is a discussion, not a policy set in stone. I await the suggestions that are sure to follow. While I agree in principle with "Jim in Ottawa", I see a problem.His idea does not cover the people who will not save,or plan for their own retirements. While there is some truth in saying they get what they deserve,in real life,having them live in poverty almost always means they are on the door begging for tax dollasrs to replace what they refused to do for themselves. Make the system as flexible as possible so all people have more choices.But the system MUST be self financing.Like all pensions,what you get back depends on what you pay in. We cannot afford to take general revenue, which is needed for other developements and growth,and spend it all on people who simpl refused to help themselves when they had the opportunity.Any new plans must mean that payments are covered by contributions,not general revenue. I do not agree with "Carl" regarding clawbacks of pensions.First of all,CPP is paid on what you earned,and what you contributed to the plan.As it should be.If we ant more,we have to pay more for the coverage. And it is not clawed back.OAP is clawed back for people with higher incomes. It is fair to discuss at what level clawbacks should begin. But in fairness,if people are rich,I would prefer to not send the an OAP cheque that they probably don't need,and perhaps send a little more to people in lower income groups. ....

Jim in Vancouver
said

This is a first good step. We all have no choice but to accept the fact that people on CPP or CPP Disability are living way below the poverty line. Especially single women. The fact is that this is the smartest thing any government can do. It's vital that Ottawa either expands this program or amends/changes the benefit structure. I would also like to point out that I am proud to live in a country (and I was born when CPP came into effect in Canada in 1966) that protects seniors and I would not feel bad about collecting as I've paid into the program. So I don't think that bumping up the rates is a big issue. CPP/CPPD are both taxable benefits. CPP is a good program but like all programs it needs updating every few years.


Carl
said

@T. Hull: Thank you for correcting my earlier comment regarding CPP. However, I stand by my view that OAS and GIS should not be clawed back because someone has saved their own money in RRSPs. I understand these programs are to prevent poverty among seniors, but in so doing they should not cause inequalities among retirees who earned the same amount but chose to save different amounts during their working lives.


Hans J. Neumann
said

It seems to me that the news media and the politicians have short memories. I recall the Mulroney government telling Canadians that there was no shortage of money in the pension plan and there would be enough for retirees for decades to come. This was verified by the following Liberal government. Now we are going to be short of pension funds? I want to know where's the #**"!!* money??


V in Calgary
said

What a dumb idea. Why can't Canadians choose how they want to save for retirement? Why should I start paying higher CPP premiums now for old people who didn't save enough in their youth? I bet CPP wont be around by the time I retire either (I'm 23) so this a waste and it is just a fancy name to increase taxes.


CYL
said

Pension are to be for those who pay or have paid into it, and should not a free for all like the healthcare system which benefits those who never contributed which takes away better care for those of us who are paying the bills. Those of us who work long and contribute to pension, should have a comfort feeling to be retired/a pensioner and not have the burden of paying taxes. Right now I think taxes on pensioners are too high. Only if one has contributed they should be entitled, no freebee.


No age 65 clawback for vets!
said

So the baby kissers are taken care of, and now looking into private pension plans, while our war vets ( and RCMP) still get clawed back on there pensions. War vets should have at least equal protection of their pensions as Ottawa MPs.


T. Hull
said

@Carl: there is no clawback of CPP benefits. What you receive upon retirement is based on what you paid in during employment. OAS and GIS benefits are reduced for higher income retirees, but one does not contribute to these plans (apart from general taxation), and so they are like any other government assistance programme in that they are meant to help those with low incomes. Clawbacks are appropriate here, and are analagous to the system of higher marginal taxation rates.


m alta
said

Oh yes please lets expand the CCP. I definitely want the federal government to take and control more of my money. They are far better money managers than I am. I haven't even been able to afford my own fake puddle and they have created a whole lake. When will these so called conservatives get off our backs, out of our pockets, and out of our lives. Whatever happened to freedom.


Helen
said

I believe by allowing "insurance companies" to access personal and private information on Canadians is an outrage. The American's cannot keep private information, private and by allowing a corrupt society access to Canadians' personal information will benefit who? Certainly not Canadians. You better get this right or you'll be up to your armpits in alligators in the form of seniors who have paid during their working career to have it wiped out in one fatal swoop by an American company. Just as a reminder, we are not the 51st state in the USA. Let them lose American money and not ours.


Jim in Ontario
said

The CPP is junk. If I had the freedom of choice I would rather pay the current premiums to my RRSP rather than having the premiums disappear in an unsound Ponzi scheme. I view the CPP as a tax, nothing less. I wish this government would get innovative here rather than just hiking the CPP tax.


daryn
said

Why should I be forced to pay into a defunct system?I want to keep my money, and look after my own retirement. My spouse and I are looking at retiring without government help. However, on the opposite side of the coin, I can afford my own retirement, but I am going to be misserable live to be 100 or so and be a draw on this system to get as much of my money back as I can.


KJ in Kingston Ontario
said

So these are the same banks offering these "enhanced" pensions as the ones who's investments lost about 50% of their value in jsut months during the Fall of 2008....? Good plan! Under the current system every dollar taken from RRSPs is taxed and then "taxed" again by reduction in OAS payment -- so the effective tax rate on those funds is at least double what it was while the contributer was working within the lower income range. Worse yet, any money left in the RRSP at death is taxed as income in one year -- likely creating a far higher taxation rate than what was applicable to that individual during their working life. In other words only an idiot in the lower income range puts money into RRSPs


Peter Rapsey
said

No question that we have to look at this. I'm not sure though that we have a government that really knows what it is doing fiscally. I notice comments starting to come that I have long believed in. For the supporters of our pharsical government these comments indicate that Canada and their management of their fiscal situation should be a Template for the rest of the world. They then give credit where credit is due - past Liberal Governments.


Saskmike
said

@ Jim in Ottawa. Please look into the face of a teller at Walmart, Zellers, Safeway or Tim Hortons that makes $10.00 / hr. with a small family to support and tell them that crap that spewed out on this site. Your lucky you're not in front of me. These same people serve you every day and this is the best idea you can come up with. No...I'm doing quite fine with my finances... but I would never the working poor have to draw 0% of nothing. Just another stupid person that thinks these people are slaves!


CraigW
said

People don't bother to get a trade or go on to college or university, if they even finish high school at all and when they do have decent income, they live way beyound their means, then whine about not having enough savings when they retire. The government would better spend their money drilling into people's brains that there are consequenses to everything they do, or don't bother to do.


Prof. Pye Chartt
said

"Big Daddy" government can play around with all its self-instituted savings and pension schemes all it wants, but nothing Ottawa does in this particular regard will change the fact that a huge number of Canadians are going to be out of money with 10, 15, or 20 years left on their life-clock. Our overall tax burden (federal/provincial/municipal, income and property) coupled with the sociocultural worshipping of materialism and consumerism, as supported by lenders and financiers of all sorts, will financially cripple a sizable chunk of the grey-haired set. Homes will be sold (after being reverse-mortgaged), and children/grandchildren will be "enjoying" grandma/grandpa's residency downstairs in the basement. A societal paradigm shift is required. Don't let the federal government sucker you, and lull you into a false sense of aid and ultimate security. We need to keep more of our hard-earned money by giving less to our government keepers, we need to redefine the "welfare" purposes of government through public prioritization, and we need to quit always being dissatisfied with what we have as we desperately try to keep up with Bill and Suzy Jones and, in so doing, lead a shallow, meaningless life that's centered on designer clothes, prestigious cars, and magazine-inspired homes. Make it, and save it. Have fun with the extra cash, but enjoy each day. Simplify your life, and lessen your burdens. (Thanks for attending the sermon.)


thetruth1028
said

Fix Inflation and people will be able to save more. First.


Pat
said

Good. Slight progress.I am still a big beleiver that children should be taught finance as soon as elementary school. That be a smarter approach to reduce the public cost of retirement and old age pensions.Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime


Flaherty is an idiot
said

Canadians aren't saving enough. Flaherty: "let's tax 'em more." TYPICAL!How about easing the taxes on Canadians and letting them save their own money. The problem isn't that Canadians don't want to save ... the problem is everyone is so stretched thin they don't have anything left to save!


Sandra from NS
said

They fear that we are not saving enough for retirement. Well I agree with that. But also I know that iy is very hard to save for retirement when you don't have enough to live on now. I am sure that most will agree as most live from paycheck to paycheck and with credit cards they max out prety quick. The cost of living is to high and oing up to fast. Any finacial soution they put forward will not fix the problem as they don't do nothing about the cost of living. And frankly, they deducy enough from my check alredy. More and more people are going into poverty. I make in a year what he will probably get as pension in a month. That is what they need to cut.


Jim in Ottawa
said

Bad, terrible idea. What makes the federal government think that they are any better at preserving people's retirement savings than individuals themselves? With a declining birth rate and industrial wages on the decline, the federal government cannot possibly guarentee the pensions of future generations as the recent debt crisis in Europe demonstrates. No, the solution is not to expand the CPP but to adopt the old Reform Party idea of allowing Canadians to opt out of if if they believe they can produce better results than the CPP. Allow individual Canadians to opt out and set-up their own retirement plans that fit their own needs, rather than try to build a one-size-fits-all approach that in practice really fits nobody. It's time to move away from pensions, a relic of the past, and move towards educating people to manage their own savings.


Jim - North Saanich, BC
said

While the sentiments are laudable, I would also suggest to the Minister of Finance that it would greatly benefit those of us who are seniors but who are still productive members of the workforce that being able to contribute to registered retirement saving plans and not have to convert existing savings plans at age 71 would go a long way towards alleviating the difficulties many of us face in that regard. Given the recent market meltdown, not having to convert at age 71 might also let us recover some lost ground given evidence of economic and market recovery today. Being able to defer taxes on my employment income through RRSP contributions until the day I actually do quit working would greatly aid eventual retirement, something we all must face at some time in the future. At the same time, it would reduce the tax burden on those who will have to support expanded CPP benefits should this indeed occur.


Paula
said

Seems Politicians can only prop up their own pensions with all the vim and vigor they can muster, ensuring they're well taken care of.As for the Populace; You take and accept the meager amounts of increases they offer, without the payouts that they themselves enjoyed while they increased their "golden pensions."Spending over a "Billion Dollars" for G8 and G20 Meetings...with no money left to mete out to Pensioners or future Pensioners?No matter how you twist it...it's just plainly wrong.


Carl
said

Here's another idea for the Ministers: Stop clawing back CPP, Old Age Security and Guaranteed Income benefits when retirees make withdrawals from their RRSPs. Whatever money people have in their RRSPs is money that they made the effort to save during their working lives, and they should not be penalized for having it. (Retirees should still pay income tax on RRSP withdrawal, because they didn't pay income tax on that money when it was earned, but they should not have their benefits clawed back.)


Share with your social Network:

Facebook DIGG Newsvine Delicious Twitter StumbeUpon Reddit Yahoo! Buzz

 

Advertisement

Contest

Today's Canada Stories

Labour Minister Lisa Raitt appears on CTV's Question Period on Sunday, May 27, 2012.

Raitt: Ottawa prepared to step into CP Rail dispute

More   2 Comments 2    1 Video(s) 1

Pedro Gonzalez bangs his pot in support of the growing protest movement that started against tuition fee hikes in Montreal, Friday, May 25, 2012. (Ryan Remiorz / THE CANADIAN PRESS)

Focus of Quebec protests swells beyond tuition hikes

More    Comments    1 Video(s) 1

O'Neil King is pictured in this undated handout photo from Peel Regional Police.

Brampton, Ont. man arrested on Canada-wide warrant

More

Most Talked about Stories

It is about time - as a grandparent I have watched our kids (who were allowed to fail although I do remember some nagging on our part) learn, I have watched our children now micro-manage their children. A big part of it is the fact that there are predators out there and an extreme reluctance on the parents part to alllow freedom that might result in the children becoming victims.

Harvey

Parents must learn to stop meddling, author urges