The British Columbia government launched a two-month public discussion on pension reform today, despite finance minister Colin Hansen having described the issue as “urgent” back in November.
B.C. released a nine-page discussion paper that outlines how Canadians now provide for their retirements and considers four of the possibilities for changes. They include expanding the existing Canada Pension Plan, creating a voluntary supplement to the CPP, changing pension regulations to “improve flexibility” and making changes to tax laws.
The province will accept submissions up until April 1 and will use them to develop recommendations for a premiers' meeting to be held in August, the news release said.
In November, Hansen told the Tyee the province was ready for movement on the pension file. “What I said to my colleagues nationally is 'we're not going to sit around and contemplate on this for 10 years,'" he said in a story that was part of a Tyee series on pension reform. "We think there is a certain urgency to it today and we're not going to spend a lot of time building a national consensus.”
B.C. had already been studying pension reform for some time. In Nov., 2008, a six-person panel released the 241-page report, Getting Our Acts Together: Pension Reform in Alberta and British Columbia. It advocated B.C. and Alberta setting up a new supplementary, voluntary pension plan.
Ahead of the December meeting Hansen warned that B.C. and Alberta were prepared to act alone if other provinces and Ottawa were unready to act in the “near term”.
A finance ministry spokesperson did not respond by publication time to a request for an interview with Hansen today.
Andrew MacLeod is The Tyee’s Legislative Bureau Chief in Victoria. Reach him here.
7
Login or register to post comments
Skywalker
2 years ago
The government conducts an discussion.
A discussion paper is a convenient way for the government to make sure the results are skewed in their favour. How can anyone trust this bunch of "we will not harmonize" ...you know what I mean. Unless this was conducted by a neutral person or group and the results compiled by the same and presented to the legislature, it is just another exercise in scamming the public. We've had enough of these "consultation" that never seem to result in anything other than more of the same. It becomes nothing more than a smoke and mirrors exercise and we have learned the Campbell and Hansen and Canwest are really good at those.
ReeferMadness
2 years ago
Ridiculous
Why not just extend the CPP to allow for a voluntary extended pension?
Curt
2 years ago
I'll repeat what I commented
I'll repeat what I commented on in another article.
Keep the fricking politicians out of the pension plans! Colin and Campbell and the lieberals have created the mess in this province. Do not even consider dipping into the people's plans. Maybe you could give up your "golden" ones instead of trying to pennypinch the "average" worker. Keep your hands off!
fanshaw
2 years ago
Any time a politician tells
Any time a politician tells me his plan offers "flexibility" or "choice" I figure his plan is actually to screw me over.
fanshaw
2 years ago
Because, Reefer Madness,
Because, Reefer Madness, that would be too simple and make too much sense.
I reckon Campbell and Co. will want to see their private sector friends get in on this somehow.
zalm
2 years ago
I'll bite
I don't see why the need for a comment period, if the decision's already been made that the BC government wants to combine with Alberta to create a supplementary pension scheme?
I read the paper - in fact, was required to read it as part of the pension advisory committee I sit on - and was struck by the relative Mom-and-apple-pie-ness of the proposals.
I have to admit, I think the idea is a good one - the only remaining social issue labour (and I mean labour in general, not BIG Labour) needs to solve is to provide for a minimum income scheme, and a decent portable, mandatory pension scheme addresses at least 75% of the issues associated with the kind of poverty that BIG Labour usually addresses.
That's why I'm puzzled as to why Hansen has made it a priority. There's nothing in it for the usual BC Fiberals' constituency. Business won't like the extra costs of doing business, and businesses that have done the hard work of creating pension schemes to attract employees will now have the playing field tilted slightly in favour of their competitors. Most of the mugs in the Interior who voted for the BC Fiberals last time won't like it either with their natural orneriness to any kind of government-sponsored scheme.
My only worry is that these pension funds will have no place to invest their money except in a steadily-inflationary market, and that this will give the BC government a ready source of funds for some of their more deranged projects or P3s. After all, Partnerships BC couldn't find money for well over half of the projects that came to them for approval back in 2008.
I predict this idea will die a natural death in a few months. I just wonder what book Campbell was reading last summer when he hare-brained this idea and sic'd it onto Hansen to solve?
morechatter
2 years ago
You Better Watch Out For This One
And it is not open to debate as how can you debate an issue when your opinion does not matter.