2004-1

Our translator for the past fifteen years has been Colonel “Tony” Poulin DSO, CD. Colonel Poulin was a dedicated and distinguished solder who served with the R22^eR in Sicily and Italy, eventually commanding the School of Infantry in Camp Borden before retiring from the CF.

Colonel Poulin undertook the voluntary position of translator for the AFP/AAC and did a yeoman’s job in spite of failing health during his “golden” years. As a Vice/Chairman of the AFP/AAC he made major contributions to the Association as well as being the translator.

The case challenging the federal government’s confiscation of the surplus in the federal public service, Canadian forces and RCMP Superannuation plans continues to move forward. We are now nearing the end of the examination for discovery process, the process where there is an opportunity to review each other’s documents and to ask questions of representatives put forward by the opposing party. The federal government provided us with several thousand documents relevant to the pension issues from Treasury Board, the Department of Finance, DND, the RCMP and elsewhere. We have reviewed these documents and found many that are helpful in understanding how the surplus grab came about.

For the oral discovery, the federal government’s representatives were Sharon Hamilton, the retired director of the pension policy branch at the Treasury Board and Richard Neville and John Morgan, both with Comptroller General’s branch at Treasury Board. Mr. Neville and Mr. Morgan were there to talk about the government’s accounting policies relevant to this case. The examination of these witnesses was completed in January 2004, although we still may have to follow up on questions the representatives refused to answer or information their counsel has promised to provide, but has not yet provided. The examination for discovery of the government’s witnesses was quite helpful for us and we obtained information regarding events leading up to the passage of Bill C-78 and the accounting policies that may be useful in the trial.

The next step is the examinations for discovery of the associations’ and unions’ representatives. Fortunately, counsel for the federal government is not insisting on examining representatives of all of the associations and unions involved, but is willing to examine one representative for each action. In your action, Claude Danik, a senior staff person at the Canadian Association of Professional Employees (“CAPE”) has been proposed as the representative. It is expected that these discoveries will take place in June of 2004 and will be quite brief.

Once the discoveries have been completed, there are few procedural steps left to take. A mediation will have to take place and will likely be scheduled for later this year or early in 2005. This may be a good chance to see if any settlement is possible. Similarly, before we get to trial, the parties have to attend at a settlement conference before a judge. At this point trial dates will be set. It is expected that the trial will take place in late 2005.

In the interim, we are preparing for trial by among other things, interviewing experts who may be able to testify on the equality and accounting issues. In addition, we are continuing to prepare the legal arguments.

Recent events have shown that over the years, the government has made numerous questionable deals using taxpayers' funds. Prime Minister Paul Martin deserves credit for clearing the way for whistle blowers/honest people to provide evidence without fear of penalty. The floodgate is now open and the information will be forthcoming for some time. As yet, not one minister or member of the government has admitted to any knowledge of wrongdoing. At the same time, Mr. Martin is seeking a new mandate/election.

Mr. Martin was elected as a member of Parliament for one riding. Only the Liberal party elected him as the leader/prime minister. Other Canadian voters gave the Liberal party a mandate until the fall of 2005, and this provides sufficient time for Mr. Martin to demonstrate whether he can solve the scandal problems created by his party. An election call earlier than 2005 must be viewed as an evasive tactic at further taxpayer expense.

It should be noted that one major diversion of funds was performed by Mr. Martin while he was the finance minister. He moved billions of dollars from the pension funds of public servants, RCMP and Armed Forces personnel to

general revenue. He then claimed credit for a major debt reduction. His claim was true; however, it was at the expense of dedicated personnel. Will Mr. Martin replace the pension funds or spend more taxpayer money to fight his decision in court? The billions are gone. Who's minding the store?

We have been very fortunate in finding another volunteer to translate our NEWSLETTERS.

Brig Gen A.L. “Al” Geddry CD has very kindly offered his services to translate the AFP/AAC NEWSLETTERs. As he is a keen golfer we will have to be very careful when we ask for help. It must be remembered that in Canada we have 7 months of winter and 5 months of poor sledding so the golfing season isn’t too long.

Brig Gen Geddry also becomes an Executive Officer as a Vice Chairman in the AFP/AAC.

Who made members of the Forces contribute to the Canada Pension Plan and the Canadian Forces Superannuation but did NOT stack the payments and also compelled CF Members to contribute to the Unemployment Insurance Account? Trudeau’s Liberals.

Who introduced Bill C-33 which was going to de-index the Canadian Forces Superannuation (CFS)? Mulroney’s Tories.

Who denied the entitlement to any benefits from the Unemployment Insurance Fund to those in receipt of a CFS? Mulroney’s Tories.

Who “clawed back” the right to full entitlement to the pre-paid Old Age Security? Mulroney’s Tories.

Who, during the Mulroney years, promised to rescind the OAS claw backs, rescind the loss of UI Benefits to CF Retirees, improve the CFS Act to include a 60% survivor’s benefit, allow for the continuation of the survivor’s benefit to CF Retirees regardless at what age they married and other improvements and do away with the GST? Why Liberal, NDP and Canadian Alliance MPs! The Liberals went so far as to actively support CF Retiree causes brought their attention by the AFP/AAC, in the House of Commons! Some of those supporters eventually became Finance Minister, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Veterans Minister, Secretaries of State etc.

Who, immediately upon forming the government, started to rob the CFS Account? Chretien/Martin Liberals.

Who, upon becoming members of the Grit government, dropped all support for the CF Retirees? Chretien’s Liberals.

Who, when caught with their hands deeply into the CFS Account; firstly with a $450 million minor error and then later, short changing the CFS Account’s interest rate to the tune of $4.2 billion legalized the misappropriation with a Bill, rushed through parliament with very little debate, and added another $12.4 billion to the theft! (Total confiscation - $16.6 billion) by the Liberal Finance Minister. (It must be pointed out that ths same Finance Minister, at a Town Hall Meeting in London Ontario in the winter of 1994, told the Chairman of the AFP/AAC that he would NOT touch the CFS Account because that was our money. That is, the money belonged to the CF Retirees and CF Members, he then promptly started raiding the account of the initial $4.2 billion by manipulating interest paid. When caught out by the AFP/AAC and the initiation of a litigation, Bill C-78 was rushed through parliament, legalizing the initial creative book-keeping and adding the extra $12.4 billion for good measure!)

Who did NOT rescind the promised penurious loss of the UI Benefits for CF Retirees as promised? Chretien’s Liberals.

Who balanced the books on the backs of the CF Members and CF Retirees using their surpluses built up in the two accounts - the UI Account and the CFS Account? Finance Minister Martin.

When litigation had been started regarding the issue no entitlement to a survivor’s benefit for those CF Retirees who married after age 60, at a Court Hearing the expressions such as “gold diggers” and involved in “deathbed marriages” were referenced for women who married an older veteran. This was later confirmed in a telephone conversation with the Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury, who had been a strong AFP/AAC supporter when in the Opposition. (It must be noted that some of these “gold digger” “deathbed marriages” have lasted close to 30 years!)

Needless to say that fully pre-paid Unemployment Insurance Benefits were never reinstated for the CF, but they continue to pay for the benefit. The UI became Employment Insurance (EI) and became a cash cow for the Finance Minister in his “book balancing” act.

In the ten years that the Liberals attempted to provide an “honest and ethical” government the Opposition, Canadian Alliance now the Conservative Party of Canada (CPC), never did much to help the CF Retirees. NOT one meeting ever materialized with either the Defence Critics or the Veterans Critics! (The one exception was an Informational Meeting with the CA Caucus in 1994 but nothing came out of that Meeting.) Over the years many attempts were made to get the CA now the CPC, including the Leaders, to get someone in the Party seriously involved in CF Retiree issues and concerns. At one time we thought we had some strong support when Randy White MP, CA asked a Question in the House regarding the loss of any entitlement to any UI/EI Benefits by newly released CF members. Correspondence between the AFP/AAC and White came to nought. There was one other minor flurry of excitement after the AFP/AAC appeared before the Parliamentary Committee on Defence and Veterans Affairs. That interest too waned shortly thereafter. Two Tories, Peter McKay and Dr Elsie Wayne did continue to pursue CF Retiree concerns but two voices in a sea of 300 plus MPS is but a small whisper! With the call of an election we did get some correspondence from Mr. Jay Hill MP, CPC Official Defence Critic. The letter was very informative but too late to do any good with this defunct government. We shall see who or if there is any support after the election, hopefully with a truly new government and not retreaded scoundrels.

Anne McLellan, when Justice Minister and Attorney General, did initiate a Commission to investigate the legality of the Human Rights Commissioner to pursue issues which arise from Acts passed before the Human Rights Commission was established. The LaForest Report recommended that the Human Rights Commissioner be empowered to rule on discrimination contained in older Acts. As the Report obviously was NOT to the liking of Chretien and company, it was immediately shelved where it draws dust like so many Reports NOT liked by the Liberals. (This Report was about the marriage after age 60 concern). It must be pointed out that we, the AFP/AAC, did pursue this issue through the highest courts except the Supreme Court of Canada, which refused to Hear the case. In recent correspondence, Defence Minister David Pratt has written that the Supreme Court of Canada concurred with the Appeal Court that the “gold digger” clause of the CFS Act does NOT discriminate against any woman who is to marry or has married a CF Retiree over the age of 60. Pratt obviously is trying the mislead the Canadian public or himself has been misled by his “advisors” or is deliberately lying! The Supreme Court of Canada did NOT Hear our Appeal so therefore did NOT concur in the Appeal Court Decision! In a recent letter, the Human Rights Commission wrote that it is still waiting to hear from the Justice Minister’s office regarding the LaForest Report. That office will have a long waiting period unless we get a change in government.

The discrimination against CF Retirees’ survivors who receive only the 50% benefit contrary to the Canada Pension Benefits Act also is a non-starter issue with all Political Parties, yet the MPs have ensured that their survivors get a 60% benefit.

Employment Insurance Benefits continue to be denied to recent CF Retirees although fully pre-paid by them while Serving Canada, Honourably in uniform.

Until we get our confiscated CFS Act surpluses back, our chances of improving the CFS for those who retired before the massive increases in pay are slim. As a matter of fact current comments coming out of Defence is that because there is a shortage of funds in CFS Account, premiums will have to be raised in order to sustain the CFS at its current level. (The stolen $16.6 billion is of course NOT mentioned). (See the notes on the CFS Act elsewhere in this NEWSLETTER).

I received a copy of your letter, dated 22 April 2004 regarding the subject of marriage after age 60 for the Canadian Armed Forces from the Liberal Member of Parliament, Mrs Marlene Catterall. We spoke at length at our meeting on April 30^th and I would like to discuss some of the points raised with you.

Our Association has been urging the government for years to amend Section 31 of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act (CFSA). As you know this antiquated regulation was passed in 1901 under Canada’s Militia Pension Act and was based on what our government saw happening in the United States after the their civil war of 1865. Very young girls were marrying veteran pensioners for their money. These marriages were called “deathbed” marriages and these girls were called “gold-diggers”. Hence, Section 31 is commonly called the “gold-digger” clause.

In this day age 60 is not considered old, and members of our Armed Forces do not need protection from sweet young things, male or female! Every man or woman pays the same rate into the Canadian Forces Superannuation Account and expects a pension upon release from the Service. They also expect that their spouses will receive a percentage of that pension upon their deaths. It should not matter if he, or she, marries after age 60.

The government’s argument on not amending Section 31 is that they see it as opening the door to abuse. The probability of multiple widowhoods increasing, with widows and widowers remarrying and collecting the pension benefits of several deceased members is negative thinking. All CF Retirees who marry after age 60 now suffer for that thinking. (Currently there are one or two widows collecting two CF Superannuation's because their second husbands were Serving when they remarried).

There is enough money in the CFS Account to cover this amendment if the government has the will to look after their military personnel honestly. They served their country well and Honourably in wartime and in peacemaking operations and deserve to be looked after when they retire with fairness and without discrimination because of age and marital status.

In paragraph 4, you mention the “assumption” under which the CFSA Section 31 is based is blatant discrimination. As mentioned above, everyone pays the same rate into the plan but only some Retirees can collect!

In paragraph 6, you mention that the CFSA is not in breach of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In fact, the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) believes that Section 31 if the CFSA is unfair and discriminatory and should be amended. They submitted a Report to the Justice Minister in April of 2000 about this and had not heard back from them as yet. (Editorial Note: a letter from the CHRC dated May 06 2004 to our lawyer confirms the above statement).

I am well aware that as Defence Minister you are very interested in what is happening with the Canadian Armed Forces, with the Peacekeepers and also with the veterans of World War II and Korea. We hope that you will also be concerned about what is happening to the Armed Forces Retirees when they marry after age 60. The Canadian Forces Superannuation is not large enough for two to live on now let alone put money aside for a survivor’s benefit for their spouses, that is unless they retire as Brigadiers or above that rank.

Waterloo Insurance is part of The Economical Insurance Group, a Canadian-owned mutual insurance company with almost $2 billion in assets and a surplus of over $650 million to protect its policyholders. We provide industry leading insurance coverage for private passenger cars, utility vehicles, vans and trucks. As well, we can provide coverage for your recreational vehicles, such as motorcycles, snowmobiles, motor homes and trailers. We also provide a broad and flexible array of personal property insurance coverage for homeowners, tenants, and condominium owners. Property coverage is also available for seasonal (cottages) or secondary residences (rentals), boats and motors, jewellery and furs, sports equipment, musical instruments, yachts and more.

Waterloo’s top of the line insurance coverages are complemented with competitive rates and numerous opportunities for discounts. In addition to your Waterloo Insurance group discount, you could save over 50% more with discounts such as multi-vehicle, vehicle anti-theft system, new home, home alarm, claims free status, policyholder age or by having both auto and property coverage with Waterloo. Premium payments with us are also fast and convenient with three payments options – pre-authorized payments (regular withdrawals from your financial institution), an instalment plan or full payment (cash, cheque, credit card). Most financial institutions also allow you to pay Waterloo Insurance via telephone and Internet banking. Our claims service is also available 24-hours as day, seven days a week via a single toll-free number. Call us today at 1-866-247-7700 for an immediate no-obligation quote.

(This is an unpaid commercial for Waterloo Insurance who has provided a Group Insurance Rate for AFP/AAC Members. Members, as good consumers, are still reminded that as a practice they should shop around and compare prices).

This issue continues to keep cropping up as another group of CF Retirees reaches age 65.

When the Canadian Forces Members were compelled to participate in the Canada Pension Plan in 1967 it was decided, with NO consultation with contributors, that members of the forces could afford to contribute to both retirement plans simultaneously, that is integrated. This decision was made by the bureaucracy which had became entrenched in the DND upon the Lance Bombardier Paul Hellier/PET Trudeau political make-over of Canada’s proud military.

So that upon reaching age 65, when the CPP was to kick in, the Canadian Forces Superannuation was to be reduced by an amount equal to the number of years that a contributor paid into BOTH plans. That is if one contributed for ten years then ten years worth of the CFS would be deducted from the recipient who would receive the full CPP. A second deduction would also be made for the years that the recipient’s CFS was indexed. If one had contributed for 35 years to the CFS and the CPP then almost the entire amount of the CPP would deducted from the CFS to provide the full CPP. (Clear as mud by now?)

Most unions and other organizations did not go along with this foolishness of combining the two plans and had contributions STACKED. This method of payment at age 65 gave retirees the entire amount of the CPP benefit and also all of the company sponsored pension plan.

To change this fancy-book keeping it would take an amendment to the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act. However, as current retirees have not made stacked contributions, it is most unlikely that any government would change the current arrangement for those now retired. This would apply to those who after retirement from the military worked and paid into the CPP for another 15 years or more as civilians. The government’s excuse would always be, “can’t afford it”. (Remember, at least $16.6 billion was siphoned from the CFS Account so there goes any help from the government or the inflated bureaucratic fat at DND).

The following is the only letter we ever received from any Leader or Defence Critic of the Reform or CA Parties. There must be an election in the offing!

Thank you for your e-mail dated May 14, 2004 regarding the Annual Report for the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act, as well as other issues of importance to your membership.

As you are aware, the CF Superannuation Act 2002/2003 Annual Report has not yet been tabled by the government. I have been informed that the report is scheduled to be tabled after the House of Commons resumes sitting in September.

I find this delay rather disturbing as it further demonstrates the federal Liberal government's increasing lack of regard for reporting to Parliament and for being accountable to Canadians. The failure to table the CF Superannuation Act Annual Report in a timely manner appears to have become an established trend.

While the 1999/2000 Annual Report was tabled on February 9, 2001, the 2000/2001 report was not tabled until May 9, 2002. Following that, the 2001/2002 Report wasn't tabled until October 31, 2003.

Your membership is justifiably suspicious about these unacceptable delays given the federal government's $16.6-billion "dip" into the CFS Account.

Plan members have a right to examine how their pensions are being managed and to know whether the government has once again helped itself to your money!

With regard to Employment Insurance premiums paid by CF members while in service even though they are not eligible to receive EI benefits, you're undoubtedly aware that the Conservative Party of Canada had limited time between the "birth" of our party and the Prime Minister's election call to seek direction from grassroots members on specific policies. However, as Senior National Defence Critic, the issue of CF members' EI premiums is a subject I am currently examining as part of our Party's ongoing efforts to develop and refine our policies.

There are Canadians aside from CF personnel who are forced to pay EI premiums yet are not eligible for benefits. Small business owners owning less than forty percent of their company are classified as employees and must pay EI premiums, yet they are not eligible to receive benefits. This affects many farmers, store owners and other family businesses or partnerships. I believe when approaching changes to the EI program, we must consider all of those affected.

My concerns about the government's lack of accountability to CF pensioners have intensified following recent attempts by my colleague, Conservative Party Senior Veterans' Affairs Critic Rick Casson, to raise pension-related

issues on behalf of veterans at the House of Commons Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs.

Mr Casson first voiced his concerns about the "gold diggers" clause and benefit rates when officials from Veterans Affairs appeared before the subcommittee, only to be told that such issues were outside their department's mandate.

He then attempted to raise these matters with Military Ombudsman Andre Marin at a subcommittee meeting soon after, only to be told that veterans' pension matters fall outside his mandate as well. To these comments Mr. Casson responded; "You see, now there we have a problem. They're saying it's off limits to them and you're saying it's off limits to you. There seems to be a gap in the middle. There is a gap indeed and one that I believe needs to urgently be filled.

I also believe that to help simplify matters, the same pension rules that apply to all other federal public servants, should apply to CF pensioners”.

It boils down to equity and fairness and the fact that the government should not be in the business of making judgements about Canadians marrying at a later age.

I would like to thank you for this opportunity to exchange thoughts on our mutual concerns regarding the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act and the Employment Insurance Act.

Should your members have any further questions or views they would like to share, I invite them to contact me or my colleague, Rick Casson, MP CPC.

There are a lot of folks who can't understand how we came to have an oil shortage in Canada.

Well, there's a very simple answer. Nobody bothered to check the oil. We just didn't know we were getting low.

I think the effort to resettle refugees in smaller communities is an excellent effort. These refugees may find it easier to integrate into a smaller community especially if accompanied by some of their compatriots.

I also found it interesting that the federal government provides a single refugee with a monthly allowance of $1,890 and each can also get an additional $580 in social assistance for a total of $2,470. This compares “very well” to a single pensioner who after contributing to the growth and development of Canada for 40 years can only receive a monthly maximum of $1,012 in old age pension and Guaranteed Income Supplement.

Minister of National Defence

Annual Report on the Status of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act

for year 2002

The Canadian Forces Superannuation Act clearly states that the Minister of National Defence must publish a full Report on the status of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act Annually!.

It is also quite obvious that John McCallum was NOT and David Pratt is NOT sufficiently familiar with their appointments as Defence Ministers to produce and table the Report for 2002.

Has someone again been dipping into the CFS Account and a Liberal cover-up is taking place?

Repeated requests of the two Ministers past and present has yielded nothing but a comment from some clerk that our correspondence will be “reviewed”.

One excuse for the delay has been that the Report had to be submitted to the Auditor General. That is an added step and could catch any new shenanigans by any government. However, it would appear that the Assistant Auditor General who signed off on the 2001 missed out that the total confiscation from our retirement savings would appear to now be in excess of $20 billion and. NOT the $16.6 billion authorized by Bill C-78!

Perhaps that is why the 2002 Report has been deliberately delayed until after the election when the Liberals had hoped that they would again be Canada’s dictators!

In the extract from the 2001 Report that follows it would appear that the previous confiscation of the $4.2 billion was missed as there was another $16 plus billion that was gobbled up by the “Fiberal” Party.

Minister of Defence’s Annual Report

the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act

For those with internet access some Annual Reports are at the following location:

www.forces.gc.ca/admfincs/financial_docs/arcfsa/intro_e.asp

It must be noted that the Report for 2002/2003 is still being created and is NOT expected to be released until after the election. One has to wonder if the government has continued to dip into our retirement savings so that Paul Martin can cotinue to claim that he has balanced the budget or on the other hand keep some of his exorbitant pre-election promises being used to buy votes on the backs of the CF and CF Retirees?

The following are extracts from the 2001/2002 Report:

Assets at beginning of fiscal year 2002 - $51.5 billion

Increase in Assets.- $4.387 billion

Contributions - $684 million.

Total increase in Assets - $5.1 billion.

Decrease in Assets:

Benefits (CFS payout) $1.847 billion.

Confiscation due to Bill C-78 -$14.772 billion.

Net Assets at end of year - $39.966 billion!

It is pointed out that the increase in assets exceeded Benefits by $2.45 billion! Enough to cover the improvements in the CFS demanded by the AFP/AAC! This increase is typical of the increases which occur every year. That is where the surplus came from and from which the government stole our retirement savings.

It also must be noted that the Confiscation amounted to $14.772 billion which, plus the $4.2 billion in the previous grab in reduced interest payments equals $18.972 billion! That is $2.372 billion in excess of that authorized by Bill C-78! One has to wonder why the delay in publishing the Report for 2002/2003 until after the election. Has even more of our money been confiscated?

The 2001/2002 Report does have a Note that “the legal validity of these provisions has been challenged in the courts”. (This refers to our action to recover the stolen funds).

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 Form is NOT necessary. If your Membership number or Postal Code is legible your data can be easily accessed and updated. Therefore it is NOT necessary to damage your NEWSLETTER.

If your membership has expired it is highlighted.

Those whose membership expired in 2002 are receiving a courtesy copy because of the election promises and past records of the elected and their bureaucrats and the unelected in the PMO.

Please note the membership expiry date on your envelope!

We DO NOT mail out expiry notices!!

Tel:- 1 (519) 471-9232

e-mail:- afp.aac.ewh@sympatico.ca

The next time you hear a politician use the word "billion," casually, think about whether you want the politician spending your tax money. A billion is a difficult number to comprehend, but one advertising agency did a good job of putting that figure into perspective in one of its releases.

A billion dollars ago was only 8 hours and 20 minutes, at the rate the Liberals spend it.