Who Supports the Canadian Forces Retirees?

Pension Reform Bills since 1992:

Bill C-33/1986. This Bill, if passed, would have de-indexed the Canadian Forces Superannuation. When first introduced it was supported by the two major public service unions: the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) and the Professional Institute of Public Servants (PIPS), the Federal Superannuates National Association (FSNA) and one minor union. The Bill was vehemently opposed by the Armed Forces Pensioners’/Annuitants’ Association of Canada (AFP/AAC).

When members of the two major unions became aware of the support of their executives for a law which would have deprived them of full indexation of their superannuation, the proverbial hit the fan! Both major unions quickly withdrew their support, leaving only the FSNA and one small union supporting the government’s action. The AFP/AAC continued to strongly voice its objection to the reduction in the pre-paid retirement benefit.

Bill C-33/1986 died on the Order Paper before it could be implemented, when Mulroney called an election.

Bill C-55/1992. This Bill, theoretically, was to bring the Canadian Forces Superannuation Act into conformity with the Income Tax Act. Unfortunately it introduced unfavourable changes to the Act but did NOT conform to the Canada Pension Benefits Standards Act, namely a 60% survivor’s benefit and the entitlement to a survivors’ benefit regardless age at marriage! The AFP/AAC again objected to the Bill unless it was amended to include benefits such as a Survivors’ Benefit for those who married after age 60, the survivors’ benefit to be the same as that for MPs; ie 60%, remedy the losses sustained by the penurious "6 and 5" legislation and many others. The AFP/AAC did support the amalgamation of the basic CFS Account with the Supplementary Retirement Benefit Account (indexation account). This latter was to stop the government from complaining about not being able to sustain the superannuations at the established levels because the basic CFS Account was slightly short of funds. Needless to say, when the two accounts were combined, the next government, the Chrétien Liberals, found that it had horrendously large surpluses and so decided to commence nibbling at the account. When caught and legal action was undertaken by the AFP/AAC, supporting a union, to recover the illegal "creative bookkeeping", the government decided to legalize its thefts by introducing Bill C-78/1999. It must pointed out that the CFS Account - after the "illegal" withdrawals still stands at $47 billion! The sole property of the contributors and the retirees! That is more than enough to make major improvements to the CFS and still have billions left over for investment by the contributors, and not misused by the government.

The AFP/AAC and all unions opposed this Bill but were not given any opportunity to fight this legislation as it was rammed through parliament. However, during the limited debate before closure was enacted, the President of the Treasury Board, Marcel Masse, repeatedly stated in the House that he had the support of the largest public service retiree association in Canada, and the support of the Quebec and Federal courts.

In order to find out what the name of that "largest public service retiree association" was, the AFP/AAC launched a Request under the Access to Information Act. The answer came back that the association was the "Federal Superannuates National Association (FSNA)". The answer was a signed hard copy letter and confirmed by an e-letter.

So now we know who supports the retirees.

There is no evidence that any Federal Court has ever supported the confiscation of retirement savings from any contributors by an employer.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pursuit of Justice by the Armed Forces Pensioners’/Annuitants’ Association of Canada (AFP/AAC) on behalf of the Canadian Forces Retirees.

The following is report on legal expenses in pursuit of Justice.

LITIGATION COSTS to:- 4 December 2000

Legal costs incurred since the Armed Forces Pensioners’/Annuitants’ Association of Canada (AFP/AAC) undertook challenging the government on its unwillingness to provide justice for the Canadian Forces Superannuates.

1. Contesting the issue of there being no provision for a survivors’ benefit for those Canadian Forces Retirees who married after age 60. This lack of benefit is in contravention of the Canada Pension Benefits Standards Act;

$33,649.65 to Nelligan Powell towards costs incurred by the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPS) which was the prime litigant and to the Social Sciences Employees Association (SSEA) which undertook subsidizing the case after the PIPS ceased pursuing the issue. The contributions also include $13,000.00 in direct payments to Caroline Engelmann Gottheil after the SSEA discontinued its subsidization.

2. Contesting the initial grab of superannuation funds and the creative booking with respect to interest paid on funds in the Canadian Forces Superannuation Account:

$23,202.22 in costs regarding irregularities by the government regarding the withdrawal of funds from the Canadian Forces Superannuation Account and low interest payments. It is to be noted that this litigation was commenced in June 1997, and that the AFP/AAC was the only retiree group to participate in commencing this legal action. The SSEA, the RCMP Association/de la GRC and the Aircraft Operations Group Association (AOGA) were also involved in this litigation. The SSEA was the prime Plaintiff. As a result of this litigation, the government obviously decided that its actions were illegal and proceeded to legalize its action through Bill C-78/1999. This Bill thus precluded any further action with this initial litigation. Reiterating, when Bill C-78/1999 was introduced, and during the limited debate in the House of Commons, the President of the Treasury Board, Marcel Massé repeatedly stated that the Bill was supported by the "largest public service retiree association in Canada". Access to Information has now indicated that the name of that association was the Federal Superannuates National Association (FSNA).

3. Contesting the legality of Bill C-78/1999. The federal government has failed to prevent the Trial to be held in an Ontario Provincial Court. The federal government is stonewalling on this issue by claiming that the Provincial Court system is inappropriate whereas a Provincial Court judge has ruled otherwise and ordered the Federal government to pay damages on this side tracking exercise. The battle continues over this issue as the Federal government continues to appeal Provincial judges decisions! Therefore no trial date has been set on the main war, that is, to return our savings. So far the government’s stubbornness has cost:

$34,547.91 to Caroline Englemann Gottheil in the pursuit of justice to have the confiscated retirement surpluses returned to its rightful owners, the contributors (in the case of the CFS Account the total sum is $16.6 billion). We undertook a separate action to that of the two union consortiums as it was felt that, as the military was not unionized, it would be best to seek justice on behalf of those who Served/Serve Canada Honourably, in uniform. Three RCMP Associations are also participating with us in this litigation. They are: L’Association des Membres de la Police Montée du Quebec (L’AMPMQ), the B.C. Mounted Police Professional Association and the Mounted Police Association of Ontario. The L’AMPMQ has contributed $10,000.00 to the AFP/AAC as its share of litigation costs.

4. Total costs for all legal actions since June 1997 to date: $91,399.78.

Hopefully we will not have to wait until the next millennium for justice.