MPs Cash in on $116 million in Pension & Severance Bonanza

OTTAWA, ON: The Canadian Taxpayers Federation (CTF) today released its calculations of estimated pension and severance payments paid to the 113 MPs who were either defeated or did not seek re-election in the May 2, 2011 general election. Defeated and retiring MPs will collect $4.9 million in pension payments in their first year, reaching a cumulative total of $111.5 million by age 80. In addition, another $4.3 million in severance cheques will be issued to former MPs. The pension and severance calculations for individual MPs are available HERE.

“While many MPs went down to defeat last night, most are still  big winners,” said CTF National Research Director Derek Fildebrandt. “Even though losing an election can be hard, MPs should find a nice soft landing with their ‘golden parachute.’”

Seventeen  former MPs will gather more than $100,000-plus a year in pension income including: Peter Milliken ($147K), Gilles Duceppe ($141K), Joe Volpe ($120K), and Jean-Pierre Blackburn ($106K).

As for the lifetime sweepstakes (estimated benefits to age 80) 5 MPs enter the  $3-million dollar-plus club including:  Keith Martin ($3.9 million), Albina Guarnieri ($3.8 million), Jay Hill ($3.3 million), Chuck Strahl ($3.3 million) and Michel  Guimond ($3 million). An additional 19 MPs will receive more than $2 million before reaching age 80.

The CTF supports a reasonable pension plan and severance package for MPs commensurate with norms in the private sector. Since it’s founding in 1990, the CTF has consistently advocated for the introduction of a matching dollar-for-dollar defined-contribution pension plan – as the CTF successfully campaigned for in Saskatchewan and Ontario. The current federal defined-benefit pension plan requires taxpayers to cough up $4 for every $1 contributed by an MP.

Fildebrandt stated, “The vast majority of Canadians working in the private sector have no private pension plan of their own and those few who do, normally have defined-contribution, RRSP-style plans. Most Canadians have to save for their retirements the old-fashion way. MPs by contrast are guaranteed a steady payout regardless of how investments and the market perform.”

Defeated or retiring MPs are eligible to collect a fully-indexed pension at age 55 if they have served at least 6 years in the House of Commons. MPs who have not served the minimum years and receive no pension collect a severance equal to 50 per cent of their total salary. Former MPs who are eligible for a pension but have not reached the age of 55 are entitled to both a severance and pension.   If a member turns 55 years old within six months of being eligible for a pension, a reduced severance cheque is paid to them. Lump sum severance payments range from a low of $78,866 to a high of $116,624 – a figure paid out to defeated Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff and several ministers.

Defeated Labrador MP Todd Russell was less than once month short of qualifying for his pension, being elected in a May 24, 2005 by-election. Fildebrandt noted, “By keeping Mr. Todd out of Parliament, the voters of Labrador saved Canadian taxpayers almost $600,000 in pension payouts.”

Concluding, Fildebrandt stated, “With this shakeup in Parliament, it is time to get on with bringing MP pensions and severance in line with taxpayer expectation.  With new Conservative MPs claiming to respect taxpayers and new New Democrat MPs claiming to represent low-income Canadians, they can both lead by example and get on with reforming fat-cat MP pensions.”

Contact:

Derek Fildebrandt, Acting Federal Director & National Research Director
1-800-265-0442 (office) or 613-794-6554 (mobile)
dfildebrandt@taxpayer.com

Posted: May 03, 2011
Topic: Federal

Type: News Releases

Bookmark and Share Join Us   |   Donate

Comments

MP pension vs diability pensions

I think that the MP's are getting to much of a pension hike while people that are on disability pension do not get enough money each month to be able to eat properly.  Most of these people did not ask for their disability.  Most had good jobs and were struck down with some king of disability such as MS, MD, etc...  I think these MP's should be ashame of themself for agreeing to such a pension hike... 

And another thing during the election none and I say none of the parties ever mentioned anything about the disable people as to how they could help these people.   I think they should really think about the disable because one day without wanting to they may end up as a disable persons.

To all the government ministers and their assosiates please do think about what could happend to you one day without any notice.

RM Robert

MP pensions

Now that Stephen Harper has a majority, he is going to correct this issue!  In the "reform party" days, he did not even wanted a pension... Ottawa political culture changes everybody!

MP PENSION

SUCH A RIPP OFF.WHY ARE THEY PAID SO HIGH? ARE THEY PUBLIC SERVANTS OR ARE THEY MAKING PUBLIC THEIR SERVANTS.

The Real World

I am 57 years old. If I choose to retire tomorrow, I will get nothing. Once I reach age 60 and have had zero income for two months, I can apply for CPP. If I wait until I am 65, I will get a bit more but it is still a maximum of  $934.17 a month and I will also get the Old Age Pension. I have paid into CPP for the last 40 years and I have worked pretty much non-stop for that entire time. I spent all my income keeping my family afloat and any savings I tried to accumulate were sucked up by life's practical jokes and learning experiences. There was never any room for an RRSP and the company I work for now is good but small and has no pension plan. The most lavish vacation I ever had was two weeks in a tent with my kids. Needless to say, I will keep working until I drop dead because I really have no other option and, believe it or not, I am OK with that. That is the consequence of my life decisions and nothing more. I have had a good life and raised a family to be proud of.  I will just keep on budgeting to include participation in the standard Canadian retirement plan - winning the lottery.

My elected MPs have annual salaries and expense accounts that would be like winning the lottery for me - and they get paid even if they don't show up for work. In fact, they get bonuses for just showing up. They make more than enough to put money into an RRSP - and there is no way that saving money could be interpreted as a conflict of interest. Do our MPs deserve a pat on the back for the work they do? Absolutely! My own MP is a very hard-working and dedicated person that I have a lot of respect for. Do our MPs deserve to have our tax dollars thrown at them in blind adulation for doing a job they chose to do and that they have to actively convince us to not fire them from, every few years?  Do they deserve to be richly rewarded for doing that job so poorly that we DO fire them? No, absolutely not! Why not live by the rules that govern most of the people they were hired to represent? The benefit of doing their job well is not a fat paycheque and a golden pension, it is being allowed to keep their job. 

Most of these people are well-educated with impressive resumes that should easily see them into good jobs after they leave Ottawa. Unless they publicly humiliate themselves, being an elected official enlarges their job pool. The rest of us live with rising costs and minimal pay increases. We work under the shadow of downsizing and bankruptcies, never knowing when we will be thrown into the unemployment line. The employment insurance we have paid into all our working lives gives us half of our normal salary to live off if the unforeseen happens and even then, we are expected to have at least a month of income put aside to see us through until our first EI cheque arrives. Why do our elected representatives deserve a better break than they have legislated that we deserve?

Our MPs deserve respect and fair treatment to be sure, but not more than they are willing to give us. If they think we can live off $1000 a month, why can't they? We elect these people to represent us, not to bankroll a lifestyle we would have to win our retirement lottery to ever have.

MP pensions

I disagree with your stance.

In this case, federal government Members of Parliament cannot be compared with the Private Sector. You appear to be disagreeing with the idea of pensions, more than with the amounts. The idea of pensions includes that a person working for the government must keep careful separation between any possible conflicts of interest between her/his decisions as an MP and what is happening in the private sector. Thus, an MP cannot be concerned about building their own retirement piggy-bank while serving the country. The country thus needs to be responsible to be certain that the retired MP's have an income in their very old age that will prevent them from being in penury at that time when they may not longer be able to earn an income themselves. It is irresponsible for a nation to not want to support their former members of the government who have given up their own lives to work for all of us for a period of time. 

About the amounts, you have not indicated what life-time amount of retirement income is a good idea for someone whose work has been the governing of a nation. How much do we appreciate the work these people have done for us, including the sacrifices within their own lives? When the CTF gives a lifetime amount of a pension, you do not say what you consider a commensurate amount for other government workers or for workers in the private sector, regardless of source of the income, yet, that is essential to accurately interpreting your concern about amounts. 

There are other factors to consider, such as existing personal wealth, and whether MP's can voluntarily not receive their pension. It seems counter-intuitive for a very wealthy person to receive a substantial government pension when serious national problems cannot be addressed financially. Beyond that, it does become 'murky', and simply inhuman and disrespectful toward people who have given much of their lives to public service, to not support them in old age.

with respect, Janet

Government Defined Pensions

Canadians taxpayers should not be making any contributions to government defined pensions period. These plans are outdated and are creating huge unfunded cost to the next generation. For example, how can the ONTARIO TEACHERS PENSION PLAN have a unfunded liability for 2010 of approx 2 billion dollars. This fund has 115 billion dollars for 550 thousand employees. The total dollars for all canadian WORKERS (18 MILLION) IS APPROX 145 BILLION. There are 3.5 million GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES across this country . The CANADIAN TAXPAYERS ANNUAL CONTRIBUTIONS to these plans are around 20 billion dollars. This money could be invested in health care for all. THERE are many ways for government employees to fund their own retirement ,RRSP,TFSA,SAVINGS ,SALE OF ASSETS. ALSO A CONSIDERATION OF EARLY RETIRERMENT should be addresed .The average retirement age ranges from (55yrs TEACHERS) TO (58YRS GOVERNMENT) EMPLOYEES. Numbers indicate these people are retired longer than they worked. This accounts for the 250 billion dollar (UNFUNDED PENSION AND BENIFIT LIABILITY ) that the CANADIAN TAXPAYER is on the hook for. There is a FUNDAMENTAL and STRUCTURAL  problem that has to be addressed, however; the people who decide these concerns are the same people who recieve this benifits. I CALL THAT A CONFLICT of interest.

MP Pensions

Come on and get real - I am not paying taxes to fund their life long slaries - who pays mine - oh and by the way I only need 1 year of Gilles Duceppe's pension to live happily for the rest of my life. Talk about a great job with massive perks. We need to stop this now - no more tax dollars from me - I'll quit my job first!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MP Pensions

 

 If their formula was transfered to the private sector would it be illegal ?

MP Pensions

Most definitely, it would be illegal.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Post new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Canada's Federal Debt

Your Share

The federal government is adding $58 million a day to our debt. By 2015-16, the debt is slated to hit $614 billion. Support our campaign for balanced federal budgets and help us STOP this clock.

View Debt »

Spokespeople & Blog

In five provinces and Ottawa a team of dedicated professionals is standing up to special interests, ensuring that taxpayers' voices are being heard.

View all spokespeople »
Go to Blog »

In The News

 

 

Sign-Up

Join with over 70,000 Canadian taxpayers. Get instant action updates and make a difference.

64,232

Donate
Take Action

Vimeo video Facebook Twitter RSS Feed YouTube Channel