Bev Shipley

[Veterans Affairs, November 6th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, as we celebrate Veterans Week, it is time to reflect on the sacrifices that our brave men and women have made in the name of freedom. Can the Minister of Veterans Affairs tell the House what the government is doing to assist veterans and to improve services for veterans and their families?

[Business of Supply, November 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I support my hon. colleague's comments in terms of those who are in emergency personnel positions. They do step out beyond what we do on a normal day just because of the nature of their business and the nature of their job.

I just want to re-emphasize the fact that many of the pension plans that are in place right now for our Canadian Forces and for our veterans exceeds that of the normal standards within Canada.

[Business of Supply, November 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, the deep commitment of all members in the House is not only to this country but to our veterans who have given us the opportunity to debate in this House, on a day to day basis, issues that are important to this country. We have the opportunity to debate today because our veterans from wars past gave us the freedom to do what we are doing today.

As we go forward, especially in committee, I think the member will find that all of us in the committee, who have been very cooperative, will be looking to do what we can, in a reasonable and responsible manner, for all veterans.

One thing that has come about that will be so significant to our veterans is the discussion, the interviews and the investigation into the ombudsman. As we move forward in that respect, many of the things that will be talked about today will have that extra voice. Hopefully, as we bring this position forward, veterans will then have the opportunity to use that body of influence to bring issues forward, not unlike the one the member raised today.

[Business of Supply, November 2nd, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is indeed a pleasure to have the opportunity today to speak to this motion. I will be splitting my time with the member for Beauport—Limoilou.

I would like to respond to the motion by stating that the federal government and all Canadians recognize the dangerous demands imposed on the members of the Canadian Forces. We want to recognize the commitment and certainly the responsibility and the contribution that these veterans have made and continue to make to our great country and around the world.

That is why, in recognition of their unique needs, a comprehensive program of pensions and benefits is provided to ensure a generous level of protection to the members of the Canadian Forces and their families. These benefits include life insurance, disability, pension plan benefits in their retirement or in the event of disability or death.

The President of the Treasury Board is the minister responsible for the financing and the funding of the Canadian Forces pension plan as well as other federal public sector pensions, including those of the public service and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police. In light of that, he wishes to reassure the Canadian Forces, RCMP and all federal public service employees and pensioners that they benefit from a complete package of pensions and benefits for themselves and their survivors.

Even though the federal public service offers comprehensive pensions and benefits to all employees and pensioners, there are always demands for improvement to these benefits, as is the case of today's motion proposed by the hon. member for Sackville—Eastern Shore.

SISIP, the service income security insurance plan, provides an income replacement benefit regardless of whether a member is injured in the line of duty or not. In the past, SISIP benefits were reduced to offset the benefit paid under the Pension Act. This changed on April 1, 2006 when the new veterans charter came into effect. The Pension Act benefit is now paid as a lump sum amount which is no longer deducted from the SISIP benefit.

I would like to comment briefly on the pension plan that is available to members of the Canadian Forces as well as other federal public service employees, including members of the public service and the RCMP. The federal public service pension plan contains many features which are comparable with or superior to other employer sponsored pension plans within this great country of Canada.

Members of the Canadian Forces and the RCMP further enjoy early retirement provisions in order to recognize the fact that they often have shorter careers due to the more dangerous and physically demanding nature of their jobs.

It is important to remember also that the pension benefits for federal public service employees and pensioners are not at risk since the federal public service pension plans are defined benefit plans. This means that in exchange for their contributions, federal public service members acquire the right to a defined amount of pension at retirement.

This differs from defined contribution pension schemes where the final entitlement is directly dependent on employee contributions, employer contributions and investment returns. In other words, federal employees and retirees can continue to rely on receiving what their public service pension plans have promised: a defined, guaranteed, fully indexed retirement income.

In addressing today's motion to change the Canadian Forces pensions and benefits, it is important to fully understand the existing provisions of these programs. One particular provision of the public service pension plans which may not be well understood is the coordination feature with the Canada pension plan. In other words, the reduction to the Canadian Forces or RCMP pensions at age 65.

In 1966, when the Canada pension plan was introduced, the federal government of the day decided to coordinate the new CPP with the federal public service pension plans. Like most other Canadian public sector pension plans which were coordinated with the CPP, the federal government was concerned that some of their employees would be forced to contribute too much to their retirement savings if they had to contribute to the Canada pension plan in addition to the contributions already made to their employer sponsored pension plan.

This means that while federal public service employees of the public service, Canadian Forces and the RCMP pension plans are working, they are making contributions to their public service pension plans and to the CPP.

Typically, at age 65, public service pension plan members will be entitled to an unreduced Canada pension and, as a result, their public pension will be reduced to take into account the payment of the Canada pension. The amount of the reduction to the public service pension is approximately equal or equivalent to the amount the plan member receives from the CPP.

In other words, the total pension amount available to plan members after age 65 is essentially unchanged. It is simply received from two sources, from the Canada pension plan and the public service pension plan. This is a very common design feature in most Canada employer sponsored plans.

The federal public service pension also provides survivor benefits which are generous by industry standards. Although survivor benefits under the federal public service pension plans are generally described as being 50%, this does not provide the full picture. The benefit formula in the federal public service plans provides for a surviving spouse's allowance equal to 50% of the unreduced pension available to the member, as opposed to the 60% of a pension that may have been reduced to take into account a survivor's benefit.

As well, there are many instances where a member has chosen to retire early and has opted to receive a reduced pension. In such cases, the survivor's allowance will be more than what the plan member was entitled to receive. The 50% of an unreduced pension is often more generous than 60% of a reduced pension.

When considering the benefits payable to survivors under the federal public service plans, it should also be noted that these allowances are indexed to fully reflect increases in the cost of living since the member's retirement.

Therefore, all factors considered, survivor benefits currently provided under the federal public service plans are already, in a number of ways, more generous than benefits provided under many other Canadian employer sponsored pension plans, both in the public and the private sector.

Improvements to the survivor benefit provisions in the federal public service pension plans have been made in response to complaints involving spouses who marry after age 60. This has been referred to earlier. In 1992, both Canadian Forces and RCMP plans were amended to give pension plan members flexibility in their ability to provide protection for their spouses who they marry after age 60.

Pensioners under both plans now have an opportunity to elect to reduce the amount of their benefit in order to provide a pension for a surviving spouse who would not otherwise be entitled to a survivor's allowance.

We must remember that when determining pension arrangements for its employees, it is reasonable and responsible for an employer to consider the costs involved. This is especially true for the federal government as the employer, given that it is the taxpayers of Canada who must fund the plan.

Today's proposed changes to the Canadian Forces plans would not only increase the costs, but further place the burden of those additional costs on taxpayers. Other public service plans, namely the public service and the RCMP plans, contain similar provisions to the Canadian Forces plan so there would be significant pressure also to amend these plans.

In considering any changes to the public service pension plans, the federal government as an employer must always be mindful of the long term sustainability of the plans as well to remain fair to both the federal public service employees, including the RCMP and veterans, and to all Canadians as taxpayers.

[Josiah Henson, October 26th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to rise in the House today to recognize a great man, Mr. Josiah Henson.

Born in Maryland, Mr. Josiah Henson worked as a slave for 41 years. In 1830, he and his family escaped to Ontario via the Underground Railroad.

After being employed for many years as a farmhand, Mr. Henson moved his family to Dresden in Lambton—Kent—Middlesex and championed the establishment of the Dawn Settlement, which today commemorates Uncle Tom's Cabin Museum.

This settlement was established to provide a refuge and a new beginning for former slaves. It was through Josiah's leadership that one of Canada's first industrial schools was founded. It is where fugitive slaves were educated, trained and prepared for their new life of freedom.

At least 30,000 slaves escaped to Canada via the Underground Railroad. This was made possible by individuals like Josiah Henson. Let us never forget this man and others like him who stood against injustice and intolerance.

[National Peacekeepers' Day Act, October 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, like the hon. member for Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, like all members of this House, and like all Canadians I hold thousands of Canadian men and women who serve both Canada and the world in the cause of peace in the highest esteem.

Consequently, I will be joining the member in supporting our peacekeepers by voting in favour of Bill C-287, so that it can move on to committee.

I will confess that I considered for some time whether the declaration of a national day was the appropriate means to express our respect and endless gratitude for the sacrifice of these brave and dedicated men and women.

My concern was that such a declaration might somehow take away from Canada's long tradition of remembrance. We have for almost 90 years set aside November 11 as our national day of thanks to the more than 116,000 Canadians and Newfoundlanders who have given their lives in defence of our freedom. Even before Confederation, Newfoundlanders were committed to democracy as they are now.

We honour and thank them all on that day because we do not wish to distinguish the sacrifice of one from another. We cannot make that distinction because it does not exist. Each one made the ultimate sacrifice and there is none greater. The recognition of that simple profound fact, that one can do no more than to give one's life for one's country, is the very essence of our remembrance.

It is true however as the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Veterans Affairs has pointed out, that for a great many Canadians, probably a majority of Canadians, Remembrance Day stirs particularly fond memories. We think of the horrors of the trenches of the first world war, the great battles of the second world war, and the bitter fighting in Korea. These powerful memories make all the more powerful the tremendous place these great conflicts occupy in world history.

It is for this reason that the excellent education and awareness programs offered by Veterans Affairs Canada include special modules designed to increase the understanding by Canadians of the significant contribution that Canada's peacekeepers have made and, in fact, continue to do today.

Canada's new Veterans Charter is founded on that same belief. It recognizes that today's veterans have earned the same high standard of service from Canada that their parents and grandparents earned. The new Veterans Charter recognizes that every member of the forces, no matter where or when they wear the uniform, are accepting the same risk.

They know that at any time they may be asked to put their lives and their futures on the line, in peacekeeping, peacemaking or combat services, or in times of emergency at home. There is no question that the risks and stresses may differ from one mission to another. Our peacekeepers must deal with unpredictable situations, where it may be difficult to know who is a friend and who is an enemy.

We recognize that on one of the days that we set aside we pay homage to all those who have died in the service of our country, but the question is, is it enough?

Our peacekeepers are honoured each year on the International Day of United Nations Peacekeepers in May. Are Canada's peacekeepers like the prophets without sufficient honour in their own land? The question is--

[Committees of the House, June 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, again, I think it is clear that all members in the House are behind supply management and I thank all members for their comments. I am wondering as we go through this discussion if in fact the motion, as was raised on this side, actually has support at this time. In terms of supply management, have the farmers of Ontario actually given their support to this motion in respect of its timing on one issue? I ask that question of my colleague.

[Committees of the House, June 12th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, I find it interesting that in 2005 all parties agreed to support supply management, and this party truly does support supply management.

I also find it interesting that for 13 years the Liberals had the opportunity to do things about supply management and article XXVIII and yet they stood back and did nothing until they were out of power. Now that we are in power, they seem to think that everything should be done in 100 days.

I can say that many things have been done in the first 100 days. One thing about this government, as opposed to the previous government which tended to put programs together in a piecemeal opportunity and which talked about the CAIS program, a program built to help the government and not farmers and build on ad hoc programs, this government will deal with agriculture and the industry in the best way we can. We will deal with supply management, and not piecemeal, in support of that type of a motion, those types of things that will disseminate and pit one industry against the other.

We want to deal with supply management by sitting with the processors and the producers to ensure we move ahead in a proper and formal manner.

I would suggest that not everyone in the supply management system agrees that we should be dealing with this. Why is this government so intent on moving ahead on one issue within supply management and not looking at the industry as a whole?

[Agriculture, June 8th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, unlike past Liberal governments that believed a press release was actually a policy statement, I want to say that this government is making real progress on issues like agriculture.

The development of biofuels is a vital industry for the agriculture community and offers a new revenue opportunity for producers. I know that the Minister of Agriculture will soon be meeting with stakeholders to discuss biofuels. I wonder if he would like to update us on what he hopes to achieve at this important meeting.

[Divorce Act, June 5th, 2006]

Mr. Speaker, it is an honour to speak to the private member's bill introduced by my colleague from Lethbridge. As many members of the House know, the member for Lethbridge has pursued multiple private members' bills dealing with child protection. I commend the member for all his hard work over the years in exposing the weaknesses in our child protection laws and for working toward making our country a safer place for our children to live.

The private member's bill that we are discussing today deals with families that have experienced a separation by divorce. As some members know, divorce takes a heavy toll on the basic family structure and can pit parent against parent as spouses break their bonds.

The bonds between parents and children are important to both and must be promoted, especially those who experience divorce.