Evidence of meeting #32 for Veterans Affairs in the 40th Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was years.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:05 a.m.
Retired Constable, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
That's right.
Here's what you're trying to get at. When I originally retired, I was given 64% of my salary from the RCMP pension provider, Morneau Sobeco; plus I was given 11% from Great-West Life, for a combination of $4,647. They didn't claw back there. When I lost Great-West Life and I got Canada disability to the tune of $1,104.28 a month and the RCMP pension fund found out that I got this because I advised them of it, they clawed me back $719 and some cents.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS
This is one thing I think we're agreeing on, and I have a lot of concern in this area. For the record, they're treating the second disability fund differently from the Great-West Life one.
10:05 a.m.
Retired Constable, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
That's correct.
My view of that is that if the Canada disability is a disability, then the RCMP should pay me 64%. I should be allowed to get 75% of my salary whether it comes from Great-West Life or Canada disability to make up the 75%, because I went to an RCMP disability pension.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
Greg Kerr Conservative West Nova, NS
The difference is that one is looked at as an insurance and the other is looked at as an income. Is that what's going on here?
10:05 a.m.
Retired Constable, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
Your guess is as good as mine.
10:05 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative David Sweet
Thank you, Mr. Kerr.
We're now going to the Liberal Party for five minutes, with Mr. Oliphant.
10:05 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Thank you.
I thank all the witnesses.
The best part about this job is that every day we learn something. I'm learning about content on the bill. I'm going to need some more work on the disability portion of that, and I may hold that for later.
I want to ask a couple of process things from each of you.
At our meeting on Tuesday we were told that Veterans Affairs is redoing a 300-page manual on pension and benefits. I'm wondering if any of you have been involved in the consultation. One of the things we're hearing is that the information has been a problem and people were not given the kind of information they needed. The officials said they are revising that document. I wonder if you've been consulted.
November 5th, 2009 / 10:05 a.m.
Military and Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veteran, As an Individual
Absolutely not.
10:05 a.m.
Dominion Secretary, Royal Canadian Legion
I can say from the Legion's standpoint that we have not been consulted on the reworking of this manual. I read the comments that were made on Tuesday—interesting comments that this has been going on since 1966, but we still don't have a proper website or information out to provide people with the information.
Mr. Labelle was the financial coordinator for Maritime Command. He didn't have the information. I would find it hard to expect that the average person carrying a rifle or the average Mountie doing his duty at Akwesasne would have that same information as well or have been briefed on it.
From a personal perspective, when I retired from the military, was I briefed on my pension? I was briefed on what I was going to receive but not anything about a cutback at age 65.
10:10 a.m.
Military and Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veteran, As an Individual
If I could make a comment on the military pension, I think it should be left alone. It's a 25-year program with a penalty portion if you wish to take it sooner or later. The amount goes on to 35% of your best five years today. It should be left alone. The only thing we're asking for is termination of the benefit reduction portion at age 65. It could perhaps be extended to go beyond the 70% of your best five years if you serve longer in the military. Other than that, it should be left as it is: simple, effective, and working. The only portion that's not working is Bill C-201.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
Other than this new manual, this issue has been around for some time. I have read advocacy reports on this.
Have you been requested by DND, Veterans Affairs, or the Treasury Board for input on how this can be improved?
10:10 a.m.
Military and Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veteran, As an Individual
No, sir.
10:10 a.m.
Retired Constable, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, As an Individual
No, sir.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
It would again seem to me somewhat problematic without, obviously, having a collective bargaining unit for either the RCMP or Canadian Forces personnel. It then takes a very different kind of consultation that needs to go on.
I wonder if you have any suggestions for us that we could put into the system on that consultation. I know some may want to form a union, but I'm wondering, without that kind of organization, what kind of system would work.
10:10 a.m.
Dominion Secretary, Royal Canadian Legion
I don't think we're here to try to form a union.
10:10 a.m.
An hon. member
Too bad.
10:10 a.m.
Dominion Secretary, Royal Canadian Legion
We who serve realize we have an unlimited liability to serve.
When we in the Legion take our advocacy and policy issues forward, we take them to our national convention. These issues are raised from the ground level in our branches, such as what Mr. Labelle has done. He brought that through the Legion system as well. Those end up at our national convention.
Once those resolutions are accepted and agreed upon by our delegates, we take those position papers to the federal government, to each department. That's how we do our input and advocacy. We wait for responses on those issues, such as this clawback at age 65. I'm not sure we have a full response yet, but we're waiting.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
I need to separate the pension issue from a benefits for veterans and retired RCMP issue. The pension plan is an actuarially defined pension plan that has a very complex funding formula, blah, blah, blah, benefits, contributions, etc. Then it's our responsibility to ensure that veterans are well treated later, in a variety of ways.
I'm wondering whether the Legion in particular has had actuarial help in pushing this issue. Is there a study that has been done that could help us on the pension part? There's not a person around this table who's not committed to the well-being, welfare, economic stability, health, etc., of veterans; it's trying to separate a pension issue from a benefit issue. I'm wondering whether you've had actuarial help on the pension side.
10:10 a.m.
Dominion Secretary, Royal Canadian Legion
No, we have not, actually. It's not a bad idea to look at something from a broad perspective, from a pension as well as a disability issue and how they interact with each other, particularly in cases like that of Mr. O'Handley, who has had his benefits reduced because of receiving a disability award.
These are issues that have to be looked at, and I think they should be looked at.
10:10 a.m.
Liberal
Rob Oliphant Liberal Don Valley West, ON
If anybody has any more comment, I'd be happy to hear anything on what we've just talked about.
10:10 a.m.
Military and Royal Canadian Mounted Police Veteran, As an Individual
Simply, it needs to be recognized that we're not public servants. We are different government operators. We're different government suppliers.
I believe our pension plan needs to be separated from benefits, and the disability portion needs to be completely separated from our benefits. On the disability side, it's difficult to understand how members of the forces have to pay a premium for their own disability protection.
If you want to send us to war, I think the Government of Canada should look after our welfare once we come back with broken limbs. We need to understand that with military personnel—and I'm sure I speak for the RCMP personnel—the wear and tear on our body happens a lot sooner than for the average civilian. There are a lot of complex issues there. We need to separate military benefits and disability benefits.