ARMED FORCES PENSIONERS'/ANNUITANTS' ASSOCIATION of CANADA Election 2000 Edition Issue 2/2000 Election 2000 This election we need like another hole in our heads! It would appear that Afighter@, an expert in the Shawinigan hand shake who initiated this $200 million boondoggle, has an ego problem that can only be deflated by a major defeat. Included in this NEWSLETTER is a reprint of the final vote that saw the legalization of the confiscation of our retirement savings. This may help you to decide who your friends are/were. The $16.6 billion would have seen many improvements to our Canadian Forces Superannuation, among them would have been to have the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act conform to the regulations contained in the Canada Pension Benefits Standards Act (CPBSA). This would go a long way towards resolving the inequities that currently exist. It must be noted that we now have evidence in the form of a letter signed by the Minister of National Defence that the Dental Plan was always part of the exchange for the theft of the Asurpluses@ under Bill C-78/1999. This is in spite of all the proclamations by other associations and the DND that there was NO connection! Some exchange - take $16.6 billion from the contributors and in return provide them with a health scheme worth a few millions. If only we all could own businesses that operate in that manner. But then money for a musical fountain in Shawinigan had to come from somebody=s pockets, why not from the Serving personnel and the CF Retirees? They don=t matter, let them fly about on decrepit helicopters and all may disappear in the crashes. Election Questions Whenever a candidate approaches you in order to encourage you to vote for him/her, you might consider asking the following questions: 1. Will you scrap Bill C-78 in its entirety and start all over again with a Pension Reform Bill? This time, before any Bill is introduced, meaningful consultation must take place with all parties involved. Bill C-78 was generated by a few bureaucrats and no consultation took place with the major stakeholders, the retirees who made the largest contributions to the Canadian Forces Superannuation Account! Retirees were NOT consulted. Proper debate must also take place, not a fast track using closure under the guise of limited debate. 2. Will you support the same survivor=s benefit that Members of Parliament have? That is a mere three fifths (3/5ths) of the superannuation. (In the case of the MPs they call theirs a Retirement Benefit). That Amere 3/5ths@ translate into 60% for the benefit for those political candidates who are not familiar with arithmetic. The regulation for this is in the CPBSA. 3. Will you support providing those CF Retirees who marry after reaching age 60 with a survivor=s benefit? There is no need for this blatant discrimination and, as for question 2, the $16.6 billion surplus in our account is/was plenty to cover these two and other improvements, and still leave over $15 billion as a surplus. (Our Astripped@ CFS Account currently stands at over $45 billion). 4. Will you support compensation for those retirees who are consistently behind all others by virtue of the ASix and Five@ legislation introduced by the Trudeau government? All those who retired after that legislation was passed were subjected to Acatch ups@ but those who retired earlier, through no fault of their own, have been left behind to the tune of several thousands of dollars annually. Did the surpluses come from the lost superannuation money? 5. Will you support a proper Management Board to invest and manage a fully privatized Canadian Forces Superannuation? This board to truly represent all contributors, past and present on a proportional basis. A current scheme allows for one government appointee to represent all 120,00 retirees, one junior military and all the rest are bureaucrats. Sounds like putting a bunch of foxes into a hen house with only a couple hens therein, doesn=t it? 6. Will you support the restitution of all military to their full entitlement to the Unemployment Insurance for which they pay throughout their careers? It is now called Employment Insurance and being used as the pork barrel for patronage pay outs. This was obvious by one Jane Stewart=s largesse with your money. The boondoggle continues, according to the Auditor General. Military personnel are being treated as third class citizens by denying them the insurance available to all other Canadians yet they have to pay this surtax! It is to be noted that in order to buy votes in the Maritimes, the UI benefit will be reinstated for seasonal workers, if the Liberals are re-elected.(A contender to be a Liberal promise to break, if elected?). Cutting that benefit off prior to the last election cost the liberals many Maritime seats, which they are now trying to buy back! On the other hand, CF Retiree and military votes apparently do NOT qualify for this type of consideration. WHY? TAXATION "TAXATION IS THE ART OF PLUCKING THE GOOSE SO AS TO GET THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF FEATHERS WITH THE MINIMUM AMOUNT OF HISSING" Source: Finance Minister to King Louis XIV Supplied by F/L J den Ouden LLB CD If you plan to participate in the government dental Plan the cutoff date for applying is 31 December 2000! You received the details in the mail 1 October 2000 Support for Pension Reform Bill C-78/1999 A Who >done it= Mystery During the limited debate on the surplus grab of our superannuation surpluses the Treasury Board President, Marcel Massé, kept stating that he had the support of the largest retiree association in Canada, or variations of that statement! To date we have not been able to get the identity of that Alargest retiree association@ and that has become bothersome. An Access to Information request has been submitted to the Access to Information Coordinator at the Treasury Board in order to finally get the identity of the organization, as, at present, no one is willing to stand up and be identified. We all have our suspicions just to which organization Massé was referring, but, until we get a confirmation, we cannot name names. All can rest assured that it was NOT the Armed Forces Pensioners=/Annuitants= Association of Canada! Before the Bill was introduced, we received information as to the Liberal Government=s intention. We have always vehemently and strongly opposed the Liberal government=s action to strip us of our retirement savings - our deferred pay. At the AFP/AAC appearance before the Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs (SCONDVA) in October 1998, our National Chairman brought this subject to the attention of Committee Chairman, Pat O=Brien MP (London-Fanshawe). O=Brien refused to listen to an Aallegation@ which he considered was a Arumour@! A subsequent letter to O=Brien confirming that the allegation was a true fact, and not an allegation, and that the government was going to confiscate our savings, generated a curt response. Our concern was to be forwarded through Aproper channels@! The proper channel was the SCONDVA!! How=s that for abrogation of responsibility and the height of arrogance?
Retirement Benefit Surpluses CMHC The following is a reproduction of an article which appeared in the Financial Post on Friday 27 October 2000. This the second time in a year that the retirees and employees of the CMHC have received a bonus from the accrued surpluses in their pensions. This is the difference from the patronizing bureaucracy at Treasury Board and National Defence when it come to the mismanagement of our Canadian Forces Superannuation. Which appears to be that: >When a surplus occurs lets confiscate it and give it to the political party in power to use as a Apork barrel@ with which to buy elections. By doing so the bureaucrats win the undying gratitude of the politicians who guarantee them promotions and patronage appointments. It matters not that the money belongs to the contributors. They have no power or control over their money. Nor will we ever let them ever have any power to control their savings!=So there. Financial Post OTTAWA 27 October 2000 Employees and pensioners of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) will receive a $62-million windfall this spring when the Crown agency returns a massive surplus in its pension plan. The CMHC board of directors has decided to distribute the surplus to employees and pensioners, a move that could be worth an average of more than $15,000 a person. CMHC, a national agency engaged in financing home ownership, has 1,600 employees and 2,200 pensioners. However, the payout is based on a June 30 evaluation of the CMHC retirement fund's $1.1-billion investment portfolio. The portfolio is invested in equities, fixed income instruments, such as bonds, and real estate. With this week's fall in the share price of Nortel Networks Corp., one of the stocks held by the pension plan, the final details of the payout are subject to alteration, warns Jim Millar, CHMC vice-president of human resources. "We aren't doing a thing until Jan. 1 to verify where the market is," he said. But a basic decision to return a portion of the pension plan surplus has been taken by the CMHC board. "On Jan. 1, we will basically verify where the fund stands and if it is still close to the surplus situation, then we will do the benefit enhancements." The surplus as of the June evaluation is $150-million. CMHC's pension plan surplus is the amount over what CMHC is obligated to pay retirees under its actuarial liability. CMHC plans to retain $50-million to the credit of the corporation for future contributions. Another $40-million will be used to reduce the pension plan contributions by employees so they pay only 25% of the normal contribution rate for three years and retirees will see their monthly pension benefits increased. After that, another $60-million will be returned in the form of cash for employees and pensioners. "The overriding concern of the corporation is to be fair and equitable," Mr. Millar said. The strong performance of stock markets over the past few years is the cause of the surplus, said Mr. Millar. Last year, CMHC, with a similar bulging surplus, distributed more than $40-million to employees and pensioners. Employees also received a 50% reduction in contribution payments and retirees had their pension benefits increased. "We are going through the exercise we did the previous year -- to try and do benefit enhancements for employees and to try and do what we can for pensioners. The corporation essentially wants to be fair about this," Mr. Millar said. The first cheques should go out about June or July. A growing number of pension plans are racking up large surpluses and there is increasing conflict between corporations and their employees over what to do with the extra money. The CMHC decision to distribute the surplus, for example, stands in contrast to the federal government's move last year to take a $30-billion surplus in the pension for civil servants. In Bill C-78 the federal government appropriated the surplus and sparked a lawsuit by the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC), the federal union representing 142,000 civil servants. The federal government argues that the surplus belongs to taxpayers and the government since it has taken the commitment to pay pensions regardless of whether there is a surplus in the public service employees' pension plan. "The contrast between CMHC's more enlightened position and the federal government's position is fairly stark," said John Baglow, PSAC regional executive vice-president. "The government just showed cavalier contempt and arrogance and essentially confiscated the surplus that belongs to other people." By Alan Toulin Southam Inc. Canada's largest publisher of daily newspapers Short Story - a Politicians Promise
At a Town Hall meeting in London Ontario, Paul Martin, Minister of Finance, met with AF/AAC National Chairman, Ed Halayko, and discussed the Canadian Forces Superannuation Account. At the time Halayko pointed out to Martin that the account was substantial and improvements to the CF Superannuation were in order. In NO uncertain terms he also stated that we would not tolerate any attempt by the government to use the money for any other purpose than for the CF Superannuation. Paul Martin assured Ed Halayko that he would NOT touch the money.
Since that time the government confiscated $4.6 billion, in principle and a reduced interest. When legal action was generated to get that money back, the government went whole hog and legalized the confiscation of another $12 billion (and replaced it with a Dental Plan). Paul Martin did not lie, he did not touch our CFS Account, he stole all the surpluses generated by that account and a little extra for good measure! And when the Bill came to a vote, he abstained! Any guesses as to why? Food for thought before voting on 27 November 2000!
When you cast your ballot you might want to bear in mind that this is a party leader and government that:
* Was elected on a platform that promised to scrap the GST; * Squandered half a billion taxpayer dollars by scrapping the Pearson Airport privatization contract; * Squandered another half billion taxpayer dollars and has endangered the lives of our sailors by scrapping the navy helicopter contract; * Wasted several millions in a witch-hunt for Brian Mulroney over Airbus contract; * Overcharged federal employees on their pension plan premiums and then confiscated the resulting surplus; * Also overcharged Canadian workers and private-sector employers on EI premiums and then confiscated the resulting surplus; * Was elected on a platform that promised to fight crime but instead initiated a firearms registration program which will do nothing to prevent crime but will make criminals of legitimate, law-abiding gun owners - again at a cost of millions of dollars; * Decimated the national medicare program by arbitrarily slashing funding to the provinces; * Embarrassed the nation by personally not attending the funeral of the King of Jordan - and then coercing the Chief of Defence to shoulder the blame; * Embarrassed the nation by demonstrating his ignorance of current world affairs in relation to Jerusalem - a situation which has been in news media almost daily for over 50 years; * Demonstrated petulant childishness in vetoing a knighthood for Conrad Black because the latter dared to tell the truth about the government in his newspapers; * Showed disdain for Canadian history by arbitrarily renaming Mount Logan; * Despite an election platform promise to fix the seriously-flawed Young Offenders Act, has done nothing; * Mismanaged billions of taxpayer dollars for political gain in HRDC handouts to party friends and cronies to build golf courses (for the poor?); * Slashed the public service but is spending more taxpayer dollars on contracting-out the same services; * Financially starved the Canadian Forces and RCMP to the point where neither can effectively perform their operational missions; * Obscured the truth by halting the Somalia Inquiry and handicapping the "Peppergate" Inquiry; * Took patronage appointments to heights that can only compared to banana republic dictators; * Called an unnecessary election as an exercise in ego gratification; * Circumvented Access to Information regulations to deny the truth to Canadians about how badly our country is being managed; * Conveniently called an election in order to avoid further scrutiny by Canadians of his continuing mismanagement of tax dollars as reported by the Auditor General in October 2000; * Demoted an excellent Veterans Affairs Minister in order to accommodate a short term premier by making him an unelected cabinet minister in charge of regional patronage; * Over-taxed Canadians for the past three years to create a federal surplus which is now being spent to buy votes; * Wouldn't spend a few thousand dollars to send war veterans to an anniversary Christmas dinner in Ortona, but spent millions on golf courses for "connected" golfers; * With ignominy did disband an honourable regiment. A first for Canada! * Probably lots more to think about! Voting Lest anyone thinks that this NEWSLETTER is a diatribe to only discredit the Liberal party, the assumption is incorrect. We have tried to get firm commitments and answers from the Canadian Alliance, and to date have received NOTHING. An e-mail was received from the Assistant to the Leader of the Canadian Alliance follows. If read carefully you will see that it says absolutely nothing. Subject:: Election Agenda Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 14:18:08 -0400 From: "Silverwood, Katherine" <SilveK@parl.gc.ca> The e-mail you had sent to Stockwell Day was set aside for his personal attention. Mr. Day has asked me to write to you to express his sincere regret that, due to the upcoming federal election and the increased demands on his schedule, he was unable to reply before Parliament was dissolved. Your correspondence has been carefully reviewed by a member of Mr. Day's staff, and your comments have been noted. Your concerns are important to us and to our efforts to form a government that will create hope and opportunity for Canadians. If the subject matter of your letter requires immediate attention, please contact the Canadian Alliance at 1-888-733-6761. I also invite you to visit our website at http://www.canadianalliance.ca for campaign updates and detailed information on our policies. Thank you. Sincerely, Katherine Silverwood Assistant to the Leader@ The subject matter was urgent and required immediate attention! It was some of the questions appearing elsewhere in this NEWSLETTER. A subsequent e-letter was sent directly to Mr. Day, Ms Grey, and many other CA candidates, with all our questions. NO responses were received before press time! Now can we be any fairer than that? Hello out there, is anyone listening to us? Does anyone care? Peace Keeping Medal By now everyone should be aware that a medal has been struck for those who Served on Peacekeeping duties. This medal must be properly presented at a public ceremony and will NOT be just dropped off in the mail. Service areas are too numerous to list in this NEWSLETTER. All who think they are entitled to this medal should write to: Canadian Peacekeeping Service Medal 347 Uplands Site MajGen George R. Pearkes VC Bldg, 101 Colonel By Drive, OTTAWA, ON. K1A 0K2 Litigation Following is a report from our legal counsel regarding the litigation on Bill-78 to recover the confiscation of our retirement savings and the status of the Marriage after 60 issue. The second concern first. We can expect stonewalling for a long time to come in this issue. The bureaucracy has stubbornly refused to give way and no politician has the intestinal fortitude to resolve the problem easily, by an Order-in-Council. The litigation too is going to be long drawn out. Government lawyers will fight tooth and nail to no allow Canadian taxpayers to win their stolen retirement savings. Perhaps we may have to go to the World Court to recover our confiscated money! In the meantime an appeal to the Ombudsman just might get some action. Subject: Litigation Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 12 From: Fiona Campbell With respect to the Bill C-78 legislation, so far there have been two motions before the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. The first motion was heard before Mr. Justice Lalonde on May 9, 2000. In that motion, the federal government was essentially trying to get the actions brought by the AFP/AAC and the RCMP Associations, PSAC and PIPS and company moved to the Federal Court instead of the Ontario Court. The federal government argued first that the three actions were really "judicial review applications" against federal authorities and that this type of proceeding can only be heard by the Federal Court. In other words, they said that the actions were challenges against things that the President of the Treasury Board had done or would do in the future. The federal government also argued that the actions should be transferred to the Federal Court because of the national importance of the case. On June 26, 2000, Mr. Justice Lalonde dismissed the federal government's motion and said that the three actions could proceed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice. Mr. Justice Lalonde also awarded costs payable by the federal government to each of the three groups of Plaintiffs. Not long after that, the federal government brought a motion to the Ontario Divisional Court asking for "leave to appeal" the decision of Justice Lalonde. This type of decision can only be appealed if a judges find that there are conflicting cases decided by other judges or that there is good reason to doubt whether the decision is correct. As well, the judge must be convinced that the issue involved in the case must be of general importance which goes beyond the interests of the parties in the case. The federal government's motion came before Madame Justice Aitken of the Ontario Divisional Court on September 19, 2000. We have still not received her decision but expect that we will get it shortly. If Justice Aitken grants leave to appeal, this will mean that we will have to go before the Divisional Court again to argue about whether Mr. Justice Lalonde's decision is correct. If she does not grant leave to appeal, we hope that we can get back to the merits of the case without any further delay. ------------------ With respect to the recommendations of the Canadian Human Rights Act Review Panel, we are advised that no draft legislation has been prepared as of yet and that it may be quite some time before we get to that stage. At present, the Department of Justice is studying the recommendations and considering the impact that the recommendations would have on various federal government departments. From the perspective of the AFP/AAC, it would make sense to get the recommendation to eliminate the defence for pension plans created prior to 1978 separated from the rest of the recommendations. Some of the recommendations are quite complex and it is not surprising that they will take some time to study. If the issues are tied together, the pension issue may be delayed unnecessarily. Regards, Fiona Campbell Another Liberal slap in the face Lowell Green=s interview with David Pratt, Liberal seeking re-election in Nepean Carleton Riding. 31 Oct 2000. A Canadian soldier fighting in Holland was killed in 1945 and was reported missing for 55 years. His remains were found earlier this year. The Liberal Government initially ignored a request from his family for a suitable burial with members of the family and a proper military burial which only the Government could arrange. After some pressure they agreed that six family persons could go. No military funeral, although the Dutch wanted that and offered to cooperate. David Pratt tried to put a Liberal spin on the refusal in spite of the Liberals spending $143,000,000 on hotel and golf courses in the Gaspe, and Madame Copps proposals to spend $84,000,000 on a portrait gallery for politicians, and the lengthy list of other such lavish squandering, not to mention fountains, Francophonie Games, and a lavish monument to Trudeau who skipped out of Canada during the war, and now "A Canadian Hero". What is also alarming is that not ONE newspaper, or the CBC, except the National Post and CFRA mentioned the story at all! So far has our "free" press fallen under Liberal Government influence and dictatorship. Lowell: Bless you! Your comment that our "Soldiers should get killed according to Regulations" during your interview with Mr. Pratt was priceless! I might add to that - and make sure you have four Liberal Government lawyers and the Ombudsman and a couple of Liberal spin doctors at your side when you do get killed! When your relatives have to "appeal" (grovel?) to the Government for a proper burial, also make sure they have a map of the labyrinth of Government organization in order for them "to go through proper channels". They should also be able to wait for hours on a push-this-that-and-the- other-button to get through the barbed wire telephone system they have in place to prevent people prying into Government privacy. How many people outside Ottawa know anything at all about Government organization, Chrétien spider web? The militia are civilian volunteers who have to work for a living in addition to serving Canada as they do on their evenings and weekends, and in spite of deliberate Government neglect. Pratt was certainly on his, and with both feet in his mouth at the same time! Reg R. Dixon. (D Day Veteran.) Other Litigation Currently, ex-employees of the Royal Trust have filed a class action suit against the Royal Bank for having confiscated the retirement savings of the contributors to their pensions, when employed by the Royal Trust. This is another case of Amonkey see, monkey do!@ If its good enough for the government to steal its employees retirement savings (deferred pay), then its acceptable to do so by others. There will be more of this type of thievery unless the laws are changed, and that will happen only when we get a government Aof the people for the people by the people@ - and, there doesn=t appear to be one on the horizon! Membership Application - Renewal (Still only $15.00 per year) Rank or Title & Init:_______________________ (Mrs Ms Mr or Capt etc Name:__________________________________ Decorations:_____________________________ Address:________________________________ Apt No:__________ City:__________________________________ Prov:____________.Post Code:______________ Telephone :(____)________________________ E-Mail:_________________________________ Please make cheques out to: AFP/AAC Mail Application/Renewal forms with fees to: AFP/AAC PO Box-28029, LONDON, ON. N6H 5E1 A Renewal a Form is NOT necessary. If your Membership number or Postal Code is legible you data can be easily accessed and updated. Therefor it is NOT necessary to damage your NEWSLETTER. Tel:- 1 519 471-9232 e-mail:- Web Site:- www.afp-aac.org On 27 November VOTE. Vote for the one you feel might be interested in you and Democratic principles and not his or her ego! You Served your Country, Honourably in a military uniform, for the right to vote! | 
