Ruby Dhalla to give full pensions after 3 years of residency!

[Mr.Canada]

There's been some web traffic on a Liberal proposal to allow elderly immigrants to qualify for the Canada Pension Plan after just three years in the country. It's usually accompanied by a video of Liberal MP Ruby Dhalla introducing the proposal last spring, seconded by Bob Rae. People, especially pensioners, are upset that immigrants should get access so quickly, having never paid into the system like the rest of us.

Source/Full Story - http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...immigrants.aspx

This is completely outrageous. I am tired of the Liberals trying to give our money away. They are forgetting that this is our money. There is no respect for the tax payer dollar at all. This is disgusting.

Giving an immigrant full benefits after 3 years of being in Canada just the same benefit payed to someone who has been paying into the CPP for 40-50 years. This is outrageous.

It will not do anything to curb poverty, in fact I'm sure it will only add to Canada's burden as more poor immigrants will retire here. And who could blame them when they'd get free money for the rest of their lives without paying into the CPP.

If people are going to bring their extended family to Canada they need to support and provide funding for them, end of story.

I'm tired of my taxes going up and up and up. It's high time that the government drastically cuts spending and then reduces our tax burden. I'm not being partisan either I'll blast the Tories as well if they don't curb spending when they get their majority. I'll give the ma free pass for now as they're in a minority situation and need to work with other parties but once their in majority they'd better get back to a small-c agenda at the minimum although I'd prefer a blue Tory agenda.

When will the Liberals finally be happy? When we're all paying 90% of our earnings to taxes and the entire middle class is in poverty?

This is an outrage.

[Keepitsimple]

This is completely outrageous. I am tired of the Liberals trying to give our money away. They are forgetting that this is our money. There is no respect for the tax payer dollar at all. This is disgusting.

Giving an immigrant full benefits after 3 years of being in Canada just the same benefit payed to someone who has been paying into the CPP for 40-50 years. This is outrageous.

It will not do anything to curb poverty, in fact I'm sure it will only add to Canada's burden as more poor immigrants will retire here. And who could blame them when they'd get free money for the rest of their lives without paying into the CPP.

If people are going to bring their extended family to Canada they need to support and provide funding for them, end of story.

I'm tired of my taxes going up and up and up. It's high time that the government drastically cuts spending and then reduces our tax burden. I'm not being partisan either I'll blast the Tories as well if they don't curb spending when they get their majority. I'll give the ma free pass for now as they're in a minority situation and need to work with other parties but once their in majority they'd better get back to a small-c agenda at the minimum although I'd prefer a blue Tory agenda.

When will the Liberals finally be happy? When we're all paying 90% of our earnings to taxes and the entire middle class is in poverty?

This is an outrage.

As much as I like your enthusiasm, this one is over the top. The article actually says there is no truth to it - it's not CPP - it's OAS and a much reduced payout than that for regular recipients. I still don't like it.....but the article says it's not going anywhere anyway.

[Mr.Canada]

As much as I like your enthusiasm, this one is over the top. The article actually says there is no truth to it - it's not CPP - it's OAS and a much reduced payout than that for regular recipients. I still don't like it.....but the article says it's not going anywhere anyway.

I'm against anyone coming to Canada, living here for a few years and being able to collect the same money as someone who has been contributing their entire lives to. That isn't fair. However since people with common sense hate it it's most likely to happen.

[scribblet]

According to Ms. Dhalla it would cost an estimated $300-million a year for 32,000 immigrant seniors who would benefit if this is implemented but likely would cost a lot more.

I do know that 3 years will not give them the full OAS, however - and this is the killer. Pensioners with very low incomes would also qualify for other payments - Guaranteed Income Supplement and other top-ups. This is the hidden cost that Dhalla avoids referencing, and it would be huge.

This, coming from a member of party screaming about a deficit hmmm

Not to mention that it's blatant political opportunism.

[Argus]

This, coming from a member of party screaming about a deficit hmmm

Not to mention that it's blatant political opportunism.

This is the problem I have with immigrant politicians. They are basically the representatives of their own ethnic community, not the broader community around them. They know who is responsible, in their riding, for getting them elected, and those are the people they work for.

She is an immigrant in a riding with a high number of east asians who vote for her every election BECAUSE she's one of them. She knows who her real constituency is.

Another reason why I feel you should not be able to have citizenship until at least 7 years residence in Canada.

[jdobbin]

She is an immigrant in a riding with a high number of east asians who vote for her every election BECAUSE she's one of them.

She was born in Canada.

[msj]

Giving an immigrant full benefits after 3 years of being in Canada just the same benefit payed to someone who has been paying into the CPP for 40-50 years. This is outrageous.

Wow, talk about dishonest.

The article you link to clearly states this is not about CPP. It is about OAS.

There is a difference (as scriblett mentions above: for an important reason - being GIS - although even this has more questions than answers at it appears that GIS will be prorated too but one would have to contact Service Canada with a specific example to understand how much GIS would be paid out).

The article also states that one would not get full OAS benefits. So, no, we are not talking about the "same" benefits as a Canadian resident who's lived in Canada all of his life.

The benefits would be prorated to about $38/month rather than the ~$500 per month one gets for residing in Canada for 40 years.

Still, a stupid policy.

But it does not require such dishonesty for anyone to see it as a stupid policy.

A petition for those who would like to sign against it:

Oppose Bill C-428 An Act to Amend the Old Age Security Act

The private members bill itself:

C-428

Now, that's better! Who woulda thunk it? Informed debate.

[msj]

She was born in Canada.

Oh, I'm sure in some people's minds that she is as much of an immigrant as "those people" who don't speak "our" language so fluently and wears "our" dress and "our" customs so seamlessly.

For these people it has more to do with "their look" rather than where they were born.

[msj]

This is the problem I have with immigrant politicians. They are basically the representatives of their own ethnic community, not the broader community around them. They know who is responsible, in their riding, for getting them elected, and those are the people they work for.

She is an immigrant in a riding with a high number of east asians who vote for her every election BECAUSE she's one of them. She knows who her real constituency is.

You mean she is representing her constituents?

Quelle horreur!

Worse yet, she is doing it "BECAUSE she's one of them."

Quelle horreur, again!

I wonder how many generations Dhalla would have to be before she would be accepted as one of "us."

Maybe her parents need be born in Canada? Or her grandparents? How about her great-great-great-great grandparents (on both sides, of course)?

Or will she never be considered as one of "us" like, say, Bob Rae who seconded the bill, because she just doesn't have the "right look" to her?

Let's focus on the policy and not the person bringing the bill forward.

[Mr.Canada]

You mean she is representing her constituents?

Quelle horreur!

Worse yet, she is doing it "BECAUSE she's one of them."

Quelle horreur, again!

I wonder how many generations Dhalla would have to be before she would be accepted as one of "us."

Maybe her parents need be born in Canada? Or her grandparents? How about her great-great-great-great grandparents (on both sides, of course)?

Or will she never be considered as one of "us" like, say, Bob Rae who seconded the bill, because she just doesn't have the "right look" to her?

Let's focus on the policy and not the person bringing the bill forward.

I am against any more spending of our money on useless programs. I am also against the government wanting to take care of people who are too stupid or too lazy to take care of themselves. people need to take responsibility for their own lives. Plan their retirement out for themselves and not expect the government to do it for them.

All of this reliance on the government for every little thing is disgusting. Is this is what's it's coming to now. We cannot be bothered to plan our own loves we need daddy government to do it all for us.

I for one am capable of saving for my own retirement and don't need the government to do it for me. I'd like for my children to pay less taxes then I do currently, no more. At this rate of spending my great grand kids will have 90% of their earning taxed.

This socialist garbage has to end sometime. People need to take responsibility for their own lives.

Edited October 4, 2009 by Mr.Canada

[madmax]

Not to mention that it's blatant political opportunism.

She's trying to create a pension plan for her nannies

[msj]

I am against any more spending of our money on useless programs. I am also against the government wanting to take care of people who are too stupid or too lazy to take care of themselves. people need to take responsibility for their own lives. Plan their retirement out for themselves and not expect the government to do it for them.

Funny how you respond to my post where I was responding to Argus rather than my post pointing out just how dishonest you are.

You do realize that other people can read all of our posts here?

They know that you don't know a thing about Dhalla's private members bill with your catchy ideologue phrases which do not demonstrate that you know what your talking about on this issue.

All of this reliance on the government for every little thing is disgusting. Is this is what's it's coming to now. We cannot be bothered to plan our own loves we need daddy government to do it all for us.

I for one am capable of saving for my own retirement and don't need the government to do it for me. I'd like to my children to pay less taxes then I do currently, no more. At this rate of spending my great grand kids will have 90% of their earning taxed.

This socialist garbage has to end sometime. People need to take responsibility for their own lives.

Sure, sure.

Even the US (along with dozens of other countries) have some pension scheme which acts as a safety net.

Because you obviously do not understand such things as, say, the difference between CPP and OAS, or, say, how to properly respond to a post, it makes your entire ramblings suspect.

Also, what do you not understand about my comment that Dhalla's policy is "stupid?"

The funny thing is is that her policy may not be nearly as stupid as some of the people who are fighting against it!

Pardon me, I should rephrase that to ignorance.

Ignorance on your part per my post #7 above.

Edited October 4, 2009 by msj

[Mr.Canada]

This reliance on the government to fix everything needs to stop. People need to take responsibility for themselves. If they want something go and work for it don't expect me to pay for it every time. Everyone in this country has the same opportunities to do something with their lives some choose not to. Fine by me, just don't expect me to bail them out and reward their laziness or foolishness. Enough is enough, let Canadians keep their own money and decide where and how to best spend it.

[msj]

Rephrasing the same unrelated argument to the points at hand only reinforces my point.

The expression "better to remain silent and be thought a fool then to speak out and remove all doubt" comes to mind.

[Mr.Canada]

Landing on our shores shouldn't automatically permit one to reap all the benefits regular Canadians have paid into and enjoy. We need some quality control put in place. We need to raise our standards. We need to no rely on the government to do all of our saving for us. Canadians need to take responsibility for themselves through hard work and a strong desire to build up for themselves their own fortunes. A greater feeling of accomplishment comes from the rewards of ones own effort.

We need to instill these strong ethics in our young people and need to quash the benefits of the lazy and unmotivated. We need to teach our young that the best person gets the job, the one who works hard and saves their money gets to live comfortably. The one who is wasteful reaps what they sow and lives a harder life as a result.

Life needs to be fair to everybody not just the select few.

[msj]

Landing on our shores shouldn't automatically permit one to reap all the benefits regular Canadians have paid into and enjoy.

Now, that's better.

And I agree.

It's still not clear if you are capable of differentiating between CPP and OAS but still, an improvement.

We need some quality control put in place. We need to raise our standards. We need to no rely on the government to do all of our saving for us. Canadians need to take responsibility for themselves through hard work and a strong desire to build up for themselves their own fortunes. A greater feeling of accomplishment comes from the rewards of ones own effort.

This is where the ideological nonsense comes back in.

Very few people willingly rely on OAS, CPP and GIS for their savings.

That's why the rules are what they are for each program.

And no, I'm not going to discuss the details of such rules with a person who obviously doesn't know the rules in the first place (or, the difference between OAS and CPP, for that matter).

We need to instill these strong ethics in our young people and need to quash the benefits of the lazy and unmotivated. We need to teach our young that the best person gets the job, the one who works hard and saves their money gets to live comfortably. The one who is wasteful reaps what they sow and lives a harder life as a result.

Life needs to be fair to everybody not just the select few.

And how is this part related to Dhalla's bill?

Dhalla's bill is about giving pro-rated OAS benefits to people who have resided in Canada for 3 years rather than the current 10.

There are many reasons why this change would be foolish but instilling "strong ethics in our young people" has nothing, whatsoever, to do with bill C-428 since we are talking about immigrants.

Now go back to reading your "ant and the grasshopper" fable and let the adults consider C-428 on its own merits.

[dlkenny]

This is completely outrageous. I am tired of the Liberals trying to give our money away. They are forgetting that this is our money. There is no respect for the tax payer dollar at all. This is disgusting.

Giving an immigrant full benefits after 3 years of being in Canada just the same benefit payed to someone who has been paying into the CPP for 40-50 years. This is outrageous.

It will not do anything to curb poverty, in fact I'm sure it will only add to Canada's burden as more poor immigrants will retire here. And who could blame them when they'd get free money for the rest of their lives without paying into the CPP.

If people are going to bring their extended family to Canada they need to support and provide funding for them, end of story.

I'm tired of my taxes going up and up and up. It's high time that the government drastically cuts spending and then reduces our tax burden. I'm not being partisan either I'll blast the Tories as well if they don't curb spending when they get their majority. I'll give the ma free pass for now as they're in a minority situation and need to work with other parties but once their in majority they'd better get back to a small-c agenda at the minimum although I'd prefer a blue Tory agenda.

When will the Liberals finally be happy? When we're all paying 90% of our earnings to taxes and the entire middle class is in poverty?

This is an outrage.

Fully agree!!! First off, an immigrant should have to be a Canadian Citizen before being considered for OAS at all, period. Secondly, I too am tired of being taxed and to have immigrants sponsoring their friends and family to come to Canada on the notion that there is free money to be had is ludicrous. The current system says that an immigrant must be present in Canada for a minimum of 10 years to become eligible for the pension.

It's a slap in the face to the seniors who have lived and worked in this country for many years to be eligible to receive OAS benefits. In fact, there are many seniors already here who are living at or below the poverty line and instead of giving money to foreigners maybe the money would be better spent improving living standards for the ones who have spent their lives contributing to Canadian society.

[kimmy]

It sounds like a blatant ploy to buy immigrant votes with my tax dollars.

That the dollar amounts will arguably be quite small doesn't detract from the appalling cynicism of the idea. But if you complain, you could wind up being called a rayyyyycist.

-k

[msj]

...The current system says that an immigrant must be present in Canada for a minimum of 10 years to become eligible for the pension.

It's a slap in the face to the seniors who have lived and worked in this country for many years to be eligible to receive OAS benefits. In fact, there are many seniors already here who are living at or below the poverty line and instead of giving money to foreigners maybe the money would be better spent improving living standards for the ones who have spent their lives contributing to Canadian society.

How are the current rules a slap in the face?

If a person from (and lets pick a "friendly" country for Argus' sake!) England and works from age 55 to 65 and then retires, why shouldn't that person get a prorated OAS pension?

At the same time, the Canadian who lives in Canada for 10 years and then goes to the US during her earning years and then retires back to Canada - well, what's wrong with her getting the same pro-rated pension as the English dude?

10 years seems reasonable.

3 years that Dhalla's bill wants is clearly unreasonable.

One other thing - people stop being "foreigners" once they become Canadian citizens (and we can even argue over permanent residency status etc).

It would be nice if people would drop the anti-immigrant nonsense which sounds racist rather than rational.

[Guest TrueMetis]

Wow a topic were everyone is in agreement...

[msj]

It sounds like a blatant ploy to buy immigrant votes with my tax dollars.

That the dollar amounts will arguably be quite small doesn't detract from the appalling cynicism of the idea. But if you complain, you could wind up being called a rayyyyycist.

No, if you sound racist you will be called a racist.

I am clearly against this stupid proposed change.

My opposition is based on a number of factors though:

1) The current rules (10 years) seem reasonable and are presumably affordable.

2) Canada does not have reciprocal agreements with India, or China or other countries and such agreements should be in place as they are for Australia, Iceland and Barbados (for, obvious reasons).

3) As stated in one of my posts above - it is reasonable to prorate a pension for a "foreigner" who comes to Canada just as it is for a Canadian who leaves at age 28 (i.e. after 10 years living in Canada as an adult) and comes back to retire at age 65.

4) Contributions to Canadian society (whether a Canadian citizen or not) do not depend on one's age or whether one is in receipt of a pension.

5) Despite #4, for fiscal reasons certain rules should be maintained to ensure affordability of programs (see point #1).

So, you see: arguments made without referencing (incorrectly) Dhalla's immigrant origins and other such nonsense that is unrelated to bill C-428.

Edited October 5, 2009 by msj

[kimmy]

It would be nice if people would drop the anti-immigrant nonsense which sounds racist rather than rational.

Ok, this is a blatant ploy to use my tax dollars to buy the votes of that subset of Canadians who wish to bring their elderly parents to Canada and get them financial benefits sooner.

Better?

-k

[msj]

Wow a topic were everyone is in agreement...

Ha.

That's the funny thing - I think most of us agree that Bill C-428 is stupid.

It's just some of us disagree with it for substantive reasons without respect to origins while others prefer to rear their ugly prejudices (whether racist like Argus or their incomprehension of Canada's pension system like Mr. Canada).

[msj]

Ok, this is a blatant ploy to use my tax dollars to buy the votes of that subset of Canadians who wish to bring their elderly parents to Canada and get them financial benefits sooner.

Better?

Sure.

I suppose we should compare this to Harper's EI reforms which is appealing to a different constituency.

And I suppose if I called those self-employed breeder wanna-be's a bunch of lazy, maternity benefit seeking, conflict of interest, corporate welfare breathing bums I wouldn't catch any flak for rather crude, rude, and plain ignorant remarks?

Of course, I'm self-employed so, despite having no desire for breeding, I see no reason why this constituency should not have consideration for this issue.

But, that detailed discussion is for a different thread.

The point here is to focus on the issues while ignoring the colour of the skin of those pushing the issue.

The fact that Dhalla is pushing an issue on behalf of her constituents is exactly what a MP is supposed to do.

It is up to other MP's to push back if they (and, more importantly, their constituents) disagree with the policy.

I have already provided a link to an online petition against this bill and would encourage anyone to sign it (hopefully for the reasons I have outlined in my posts above rather than the "fact" that Dhalla is "one of them.")

Edited October 4, 2009 by msj

[Mr.Canada]

Ha.

That's the funny thing - I think most of us agree that Bill C-428 is stupid.

It's just some of us disagree with it for substantive reasons without respect to origins while others prefer to rear their ugly prejudices (whether racist like Argus or their incomprehension of Canada's pension system like Mr. Canada).

Ughh, I made a mistake a typed in CPP instead of the correct term OAS. That's what I meant and I'm sure you know that msj, knock it off please...people make typographical errors, the world is an imperfect place.

In addition this bill would leave Canada's OAS wide open to abuse. People would just start retiring here because they could get free benefits without paying into it. Laughing at Canada all the way to the bank for our stupidity.