Refine by MP, party, committee, province, or result type.

Results 151-165 of 167
Sorted by relevance | Sort by date: newest first / oldest first

Finance committee  That they are not currently paying. That's correct.

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  The estimates are that it would be up to about 15% when you add in the CPP and the excess amount, but because the amounts roll up to where they are now, and with the demographics, it's about 19% combined for the employer and employee.

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  This is for the very long term. The estimates are that it will take some 40 years for this to roll out and be complete. That's if there's no immediate contribution of tax dollars. This is only by the employer and employee.

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  In its current state, no, because it doesn't solve the problem.

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  Yes, I'd like to point out that the tax rules don't prevent you from contributing to the surpluses. You don't get tax deductions if you put it into your plan. If you wanted to set up a surplus fund or a contingency fund outside of getting a tax deduction for it, nothing stops you

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  It was a huge benefit, because the tradition up to now is that there's usually one pension-earning spouse and one non-pension-earning spouse, and obviously when you split that pension income between two taxpayers, you have a net tax savings to the family. It's been huge for many

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  Absolutely. I think there is a need--and I think it was mentioned here before--for some financial literacy among our whole population as to what it costs to prepare for your own retirement. As also has been mentioned, nobody starts to think about this until it's too late, really,

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  And with the universal plan, you don't need to worry about portability.

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  But it is a patchwork. It depends on each separate private pension contract. Some people have it, some people don't. Some people have employers that provide that flexibility, some people don't. You need to look for some kind of minimum standard that provides flexibility for every

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  Actually, CARP has a full position on that. It is true that in federally regulated industries, mandatory retirement still persists. The companies can't do anything about it, but they can petition the federal government to change the law with one fell stroke, which is what all the

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  The greatest impact in the securities regulation area is the impact on people who are handling their own investments. When their investments go down the tubes, they look to see what happened—whether the market was adequately regulated and whether they have recourse in the event t

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  Right, absolutely. As I say, some 29% of Canadian families don't have anything at all. It would address that group, it would address the people in the private sector, only 25% of whom have any access to defined benefit pension plans, and it would allow people to contribute to a u

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  As the only non-pension expert at the table, I would say yes, we do need experts to manage the plans overall, but at some point the rules have to change as well. The CPP, for example, measured up extremely well compared with all the other plans, even in a bad market. Why was that

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  You're absolutely right. The importance of the CPP is that it's mandatory, first of all, and that makes it extremely broad-based. It means people don't have the choice of spending all their money. They have enforced savings. The other important aspect is it allows employers an

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng

Finance committee  No, but everybody is talking about it, so I suppose that's an advance. On the importance of a pension summit--and I'm sure it will happen soon--the people at the table would be the ones who could make the changes. So it wouldn't be everybody else talking amongst themselves; the

April 21st, 2009Committee meeting

Susan Eng