London MP introduces bill to financially support veterans

London-Fanshawe New Democrat MP Irene Mathyssen has introduced a pair of bills supporting Canadian Forces and RCMP veterans and their families.
According to a release from the MP's office, the first bill will ensure that any disability pensions received by a Canadian Forces or a RCMP veteran would not be clawed back once the veteran reaches the age of 65 and starts collecting CPP or similar provincial plan.
The second bill raises the amount of money received to 70% of the veteran’s allowance or annuity when he or she passes away.

“We ask our men and women in uniform to put their lives on the line to protect citizens here in Canada and around the world” said Mathyssen in the release.
“They made a commitment to Canada and when they retire we owe them a debt of gratitude. It is only right that we ensure veterans and their families are financially supported.”

http://london.ctvnews.ca/london-mp-introduces-bill-to-financially-support-veterans-1.2859310

The Bill C-260 can be found at the link below...........(deduction of disability pensions)

http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=8172639

The Bill C-261 can be found at the link below...........(increase of allowance for survivors and children)

http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8184029



Canadian Forces Superannuation Act
http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-17/





Cheers

Only value of this is the second bill.

The first bill would be a hell of a lot better if it did not contain the word disability pension. The CF pension will still be clawed back.

Teen, they are talking about reducing of the disability pension, not from the disability pension. The CF superannuation is simply referred to as an annuity.

The current legislation reads like this

"Deduction from annuity

15(2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), unless the Minister is satisfied that a contributor

   (a) has not reached the age of sixty-five years, and

   (b) has not become entitled to a disability pension payable under paragraph 44(1)(b) of the Canada Pension Plan or a provision of a provincial pension plan similar to the Canada Pension Plan,

there shall be deducted from the amount of any annuity to which that contributor is entitled under this Act an amount equal to the percentage, as set out in subsection (2.1), of

   (c) the average annual pay received by the contributor during the period of pensionable service described in subsection (1) applicable to him or her, not exceeding his or her Average Maximum Pensionable Earnings,

multiplied by

   (d) the number of years of pensionable service after 1965 or after he or she has attained the age of eighteen years, whichever is the later, to the credit of the contributor, not exceeding thirty-five, divided by fifty."

While the new bill reads like this

"Deduction from annuity

(2) Despite subsection (1), unless the Minister is satisfied that a contributor has not reached the age of sixty-five years, there shall be deducted from the amount of any annuity to which that contributor is entitled under this Act an amount equal to the percentage, as set out in subsection (2.‍1), of
(a) the average annual pay received by the contributor during the period of pensionable service described in subsection (1) applicable to him or her, not exceeding his or her Average Maximum Pensionable Earnings,
multiplied by
(b) the number of years of pensionable service after 1965 or after he or she has attained the age of eighteen years, whichever is the later, to the credit of the contributor, not exceeding thirty-five, divided by fifty."

So, to me, these changes would remove the CPP(D) or QPP(D) deduction from anyone that was medically released, until it turns into CPP, once they reach age 65. I guess the NDP have given up on ceasing the CPP clawback after age 65.

Bigrex, I believe you are correct here is another article below

BY MIRANDA CHANTAPRIL 14, 2016 3:13PM
A London MP is calling for changes that would put more money into the pockets of Canada’s veterans.

New Democrat MP Irene Mathyssen introduced two new bills supporting Canadian Forces and RCMP veterans Thursday. The first bill would see disability pensions paid in full, even after a veteran starts receiving Canada Pension Plan benefits. The second bill would allow families of veterans who have passed away to receive 70% of the veteran’s allowance.

Mathyssen says clawing back a veteran’s disability benefits once CPP kicks in is an outrage.

“These men and women are injured and disabled due to their service and that disability continues when they start collecting CPP,” says Mathyssen. “The financial and other impacts still exist and they should continue to receive that support.”

Spouses give up careers and move city-to-city throughout the duration of a veteran’s service. Mathyssen says it is important that supports remain in place for those people after the veteran passes away.

“They [veterans] made a commitment to Canada and when they retire we owe them a debt of gratitude. It is only right that we ensure veterans and their families are financially supported,” says Mathyssen.


http://blackburnnews.com/london/london-news/2016/04/14/mathyssen-seeks-to-help-veterans/




Cheers

The thing is, for someone getting CPP(D), they are likely disabled enough to also be getting ELB or SISIP, so this bill, if passed, would be useless. If the CF pension is no longer reduced due to CPP(D), it will still be deducted 100% from ELB/SISIP, leaving those Veterans no further ahead. If she really wants to make a difference, she should try to amend the NVC as well, removing CPP(D) from the list of prescribed sources of income for ELB reductions, which would, in turn, affect the SISIP policy.

That's what I mean Rex it's a useless bill. This is a NDP smoke and mirror bill. It does nothing but because of the wording it will, IMO, fool some vets into thinking the NDP is trying to table the cessation of the clawback at 65.

Raising benefits for military, RCMP families would add $6B liability: PBO

Aug 17 2016

OTTAWA — A new analysis says an NDP proposal to boost pension benefits for families of deceased Canadian Forces and RCMP veterans could hurt Ottawa's bottom line by more than $6 billion.
The NDP private member's bill calls for raising retirement benefit payments to surviving spouses and children to 70 per cent of a contributor's annual allowance from the current level of 50 per cent.
The federal budget watchdog estimates such a change could create an additional pension liability of nearly $6.4 billion for the government.
The budget office says that Treasury Board policy indicates the entire liability would hit Ottawa's books, net of any surplus in the account — all in the year the change is approved.
The parliamentary budget office also estimates the proposed legislation would create an annual service cost of $152 million for the federal government.
The private member's bill was introduced in April by New Democrat MP Irene Mathyssen. It has passed the first-reading stage, but opposition proposals typically have little chance of being adopted.
"It is important that supports remain in place for the spouse and family after the veteran passes away," Mathyssen said in the House of Commons in April.
"Many veterans' spouses are forced to give up their own careers to support the veteran during the veteran's service when they are moved from city to city, making it difficult for the spouse to establish a career. Or a spouse may give up work to care for an injured veteran."

Taking a closer look at the numbers, the budget office says the proposed changes would increase pension liability by about $5 billion for the regular Canadian Forces pension plan and by about $1.3 billion for the Mounties' pension plan.

http://www.metronews.ca/news/canada/2016/08/17/raising-benefits-for-military-rcmp-families-would-add-6b-liability-pbo.html

Better military, RCMP survivor's pensions would carry $6.3B price tag, budget watchdog says.

Aug 17, 2016

A private member's bill intended to ease the burden on families of deceased military and RCMP members comes with a hefty price tag, according to a new report by the country's budget watchdog.

Legislation proposed by NDP veterans critic Irene Mathyssen — to increase the allowance for survivors and children — would cost the federal treasury a staggering $6.3 billion.

The jaw-dropping cost for something not associated with direct care has veterans advocate Sean Bruyea saying politicians have been reduced to throwing spaghetti at the wall in order to improve the lives of ex-soldiers.

Private member's bills rarely become law, but Bruyea said it's a sign that the politically sensitive file is adrift and in desperate need of strategic direction.

NDP MP asked for review

Mathyssen's proposed legislation was tabled in the House of Commons last June as MPs were getting ready for their summer break.

The Parliamentary Budget Office was asked to examine the financial impact of the proposal on both the Canadian Forces and RCMP pension plans.

The biggest hit — $5 billion — would be on the future pension liability of the military's regular force fund, while the Mounties would absorb $1.3 billion of the overall total.

Mathyssen is proposing survivors get 70 per cent of their member's annual annuity — up from the current 50 per cent.

"Because the survivor benefit is now being raised to 70 per cent, significantly more funds will have to be paid from this plan to accommodate the increased benefit," said the budget office report, released Wednesday.

"One key cost driver is the fact that the survivor benefit is being raised to 70 per cent, which is in excess of the two-thirds lifetime benefit as defined under the Income Tax Act."

The review was requested by Mathyssen, who conceded sticker shock may make it "more difficult" to move the legislation forward, but she added it's important the public have this kind of information ahead of the potential debate.

"It certainly seems like a significant chunk of money," she said in an interview, "but survivors have been waiting for this for a long time, and it's important there be a sufficient benefit to ensure these families are not short-changed and they live in dignity."

Challenge to Liberals

Private member's bills live and die at the discretion of the government, and Mathyssen said she sees the legislation as a challenge to the governing Liberals, whose spring budget enriched veterans disability awards and allowances by $5.6 billion over six years.

Even with the cash injection, there are still unfulfilled Liberal promises, notably a return to lifetime pensions, as opposed to lump sum compensation, for mental and physical wounds sustained in the line of duty.

Mathyssen said her message to the government is simple: "Pony up. You had a lot to say during the election campaign."

The Liberals didn't promise last year to increase the survivor's allowance. They did pledge greater access to education, counselling, and training for families who are providing care to the ill and injured.

'No one is asking how all of this money fits into the overall picture.'
Sean Bruyea, veterans advocate

Money not always the answer

But Bruyea said money is not the only indicator of well-being for veterans and he's been left asking — particularly in light of all of the Liberal promises — whether lives are being made better.

"No one is asking how all of this money fits into the overall picture," he said. "We need a public dialogue. The public likely won't authorize more money until they know what it's for and whether it's doing any good."

Andrew Bernardo, who served as a policy adviser under the Conservatives, has also made similar arguments in public.

Last winter in an interview with The Canadian Press, he said one of the most frustrating aspects of that party's tenure was an absence of data to make informed decisions within Veterans Affairs, particularly on rehabilitation programs.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/veterans-survivors-pensions-1.3725150

NDP tables new bills to end veterans' discrimination

by Staff Writer - Penticton Western News
Penticton posted Nov 6, 2016 at 1:00 PM

NDP Veterans Affairs Critic Irene Mathyssen (London-Fanshawe), along with NDP MP Gord Johns (Courtenay-Alberni), have introduced two bills that will amend discriminatory legislation affecting veterans and their families.

The first bill addresses the paternalistic legislation that prevents veterans, RCMP members, judges and public sector employees who choose to marry after the age of 60 from providing pension benefits to their spouses when they pass away.

“It is imperative that the current legislation be updated to reflect today’s society and relieve the burden placed on spouses who have lost a loved one. No one should be left behind and this Bill will ensure that spouses who marry after the age of 60 will qualify for the benefits they rightly deserve,” said Richard Cannings, NDP MP for South Okanagan-West Kootenay.

Rick Inglis, co-chair of the Surviving Spouses Pension Fairness Coalition supports this legislation.

“Our coalition is extremely pleased that the NDP is joining the fight to change unfair legislation that has, in various forms, been hurting Canadians for 115 years. These archaic laws have no place in a modern society,” said Inglis.

The second bill aims to end the unfair reduction of service pensions for retired and disabled Canadian Forces and RCMP veterans.

“I have heard from veterans across my riding expressing their frustration and anger about reductions to their pension benefits,” said Cannings. “To systematically reduce the service/disability pension of our men and women who have given so much for our continued freedom, is unconscionable. It is my hope that all members of the House of Commons will support this important piece of legislation and show our veterans and their families that we honour their sacrifice and support them in their time of need.”

http://www.pentictonwesternnews.com/news/400178721.html

id love to look at that bill .

propat

You mean the same bill that Jack Layton, Tom Mulcair and Peter Stoffer have put forward before?

The same points JT was asked by John Labelle during the election and JT said no?

So if JT said no during the election what's the odd's of it being passed in the HoC?

It's promise fodder by the NDP....again

dunno buds is it????

to drunk to go look it up right now . but will be looking at it tomorrow and if I cant find it will be calling them .

propat

I do miss our in depth discussions teen big time . you should post more .

propat

Courtenay-Alberni introduced a couple of bills in support of service veterans this week.

Johns addresses veterans’ issues with pair of bills

Courtenay posted Nov 16, 2016 at 2:00 PM

Courtenay-Alberni MP Gord Johns, along with Veterans Affairs Critic Irene Mathyssen, has introduced a pair of bills to amend legislation concerning veterans and their families.

One of the bills aims to end what they consider to be an “unfair reduction of service pensions” for retired and disabled members of the Canadian Forces, for RCMP veterans, and for first responders.

“For their service and sacrifice, veterans and their families deserve support and to be treated with financial dignity when they retire or become disabled,” Johns said in a news release.

North Island-Powell River MP Rachel Blaney, who works on the national defence committee, notes the suicide rate of soldiers after returning home from Afghanistan.

“That tells you there’s something happening that we need to be doing better,” she said. “Resources at least provide support…This is a group of people who have been willing to make the ultimate sacrifice.”

She said a major issue faced by veterans is having to prove their health conditions — a battle with which Chuck Murray is familiar. The Comox veteran suffered three accidents during 23 years of service as an engine mechanic in the Royal Canadian Air Force. He hasn’t been able to work after his military career, and feels he’s entitled to more than a monthly pension of about $1,000. Veterans Affairs Canada cannot comment on Murray’s case due to privacy.

“To get benefits it’s a lottery,” Murray said. “They have a quota system. Those that get in are very, very fortunate, and those that don’t get in are very unfortunate.”

Blaney hopes VAC and National Defence will listen to the recommendations forwarded by Johns and Mathyssen.

However, she said the two departments aren’t on speaking terms.

“What we’re seeing is lowering the services available, and making it harder to access them,” Blaney said, noting the challenges that can be presented when provincial and federal jurisdictions intersect.

The other bill addresses legislation that prevents veterans, RCMP members, judges and public sector employees — who choose to marry after age 60 — from providing pension benefits to their spouses when they pass away.

http://www.comoxvalleyrecord.com/news/401556345.html