Clawbacks News

Pension Reduction at Age 65 $30-Billion Pension Surplus Pensions at Age 65 - Tax Implications
Amendment to the Coordination Formula - Age 65 Pension Clawback Degrading For Veterans
Pension Clawbacks - CF/RCMP/Federal Public Servants Pension Clawback - Second Reading Pension Clawback - Debate on Bill C-201

Pension Clawback - 2ndReading Pension Clawback - 2ndReading - PASSED Letter to MP Vic Toews
(MUST READ)
Postcard Project

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pension Benefit Reduction at Age 65

A new Committee was recently formed in Chilliwack, BC, consisting of Claude Latulippe, Wayne Dehnke and Tom Walton, whose aim is to seek the support of Members Of Parliament to terminate the unfair policy of reducing the CFSA/RCMPSA pension benefits when we attain age 65.   This group held an information meeting on the 8th May 2007, with 125 supporters of this Campaign in attendance.

Another interesting goal of this group is to organize the movement Canada wide and ultimately have a Committee with representatives in each Province and Territory.

The minutes of this very productive meeting can be viewed on the Military And RCMP Veterans' Campaign Web Site.  A direct link is included in my signature block.

All supporters are encouraged to get behind this movement and give this e-mail as wide a distribution as is possible in an endeavour to keep this issue active.  We must recruit supporters in sufficient numbers across the country that will get the attention of all Parliamentarians and establish us as a group that can make a difference at the polls in the next federal election.  Together; we can do it!

Mel Pittman
Web Master
Military And RCMP Veterans' Campaign Web Site
URL: http://users.eastlink.ca/~clawback/
E-mail: clawback@mail2canada.com

Together we can succeed!
"Open to all Canadians"
Sign the Military/RCMP petition!
www.petitiononline.com/vets8

The Objective

Aim:  The purpose of this initiative is to have the Prime Minister of Canada terminate the Benefit Reduction formula that is being applied to our Military Annuity when we attain age 65.  The Government of Canada must right a wrong and amend the CFSA Act and the RCMPSA Act of a miscalculation in justice to our Retired Veterans.  Our Annuity contributions were always separated on our pay guide therefore benefits must be stacked rather then merged!

Campaign Presentation

History:  Encouraged by many Veterans, on the 21 February 2005, I wrote a letter to Mr. Peter Stoffer, MP Sackville-Eastern Shore seeking his support towards a private member’s bill.  After meeting with him, I received a letter of support on the 28 April 2005.  Very soon after a committee was formed with John Labelle - Campaign Coordinator, Roger Boutin, Pr/Member, and Mel Pittman, Web Master/Member.  The Web site has since been closed.  Bill C-441 and Bill C-221 were introduced to the House of Commons.

Back Ground:  The Canada Pension Plan (CPP) was enacted in 1965 and came into force on January 1, 1966.  Its intention was to provide another source for an “Income security” program supplementing old age security.

The Crux of the issue:  The principal facts regarding the issue are that, in 1965/1966, the Government of the day created a gross injustice, deliberate or otherwise, by merging our pension benefits rather than stacking them.  We were dealt with, in a negligent fashion.  Today’s Government must terminate the misguided policy.  Surplus billions of dollars are available in our Military Annuity plan to correct the injustice. This simple transaction would benefit disabled and retired Veterans, be a boost to the economy and the Government would receive 60% of it back in the form of taxes.

CFSA Facts:  On January 1, 1966 the employee’s contribution rate was reduced from 9.3% to 7.5%.  Hence, a “so called” reduced Annuity contribution to our CFSA has accumulated a Military Annuity surplus of over 20 Billion dollars.  Recently the Government of Canada released their annual 2003-2005 reports of the Canadian Forces Superannuation Annuity plan.  Take note that the depletion of our retirement surplus Military Annuity funds continues.   In the 2003-2004 report, it is noted that $630 million was retired from the CFSA surplus Annuity account. In 2004-2005, no funds were “withdrawn” from the account and there was a surplus of $1,099,013,000 recorded that year.  It clearly indicates that our contributions to the CFSA account continue to be too high.

CPP Facts:  With regards to the CPP, the employee and the employer each paid half of the required contributions.  In 1966, the Government levied rate of contribution for Military personnel was 1.8% of Annuity earnings. Over the years, the rates substantially increased to 4.95%.  Military personnel have always made the required maximum contributions to the Plan.  Recently the President and CEO of the Canada Pension Plan Investment Board advised that the CPP fund is fiscally healthy.  Today the CPP plan has a reserve fund of over $120 Billion dollars and is expected to grow to $250 Billion in the next decade.  “Again clearly indicating that contributions continue to be too high.”

Old Age security facts:  The Old Age Security plan is a separate plan that should not be confused with the Military Annuity and/or the CPP plan.  Contributions are not made to the Old Age Security plan.  It is simply absorbed into your income tax rates.  Be advised, that the Canada General Income Tax Guide for 2006 states: “You may have to repay all or part of your OAS pension if your net income is “More” than $62,144”.  In the next ten years retirees at age 65 may be receiving more than one retirement income (IE. CFSA, RRSP, CPP, OAS) therefore they may be subject to repay all or part of the OAS benefits.

Different Government Provider:  Military personnel are a distinct Government provider who encounters a varying number of issues on a regular basis!

-  Loss of Spousal income, therefore loss of CPP income;
-  Loss of member’s second income opportunity;
-  Loss of ability to purchase a home and be mortgage free during a career;
-  Not being available for birthdays and special family events;
-  We are a distinct Government provider available 24/7 without overtime pay;
-  Military personnel often face, dangerous conditions, health hazards, and, extended family separation, with        elevated levels of stress; and
-  Canadian Forces personnel are prepared to give the ultimate sacrifice to our Country Canada.
Other reasons why Veterans believe that the CFSA benefit reduction policy is unfair and must be terminated:

-  Members of Parliament are exempted from the Annuity benefit reduction formula when they attain age 65;
-  Members of Parliament can receive an Annuity upon completing 6 years of service, after 12 years his/her         severance pay can escalate to more than $500,000;
-  Upon death, widows of Members’ of Parliament receive 65% of the member’s indexed Annuity.  Military            widows receive less than 50% of the member’s reduced indexed Annuity;
-  At age 75; Public servants are awarded a $10,000 paid up Supplementary Death benefit protection                 policy.  Military personnel benefits are reduced at age 61 by 10% annually until age 70, with a paid up          policy of only $5,000;
-  The claw back to the Military Pensioners Annuity at age 65 creates a loss to their CFSA indexing benefit          income;
-  The Government of Canada also reduces immediately the Disabled Veterans Canadian Forces Annuity                  when they receive the CPP disability benefit.  In light of their personal sacrifices, our Disabled           Veterans deserved much better treatment; and
-  Canadian Forces Personnel have the ultimate liability and Member of Parliament and Government have                 the ultimate responsibility for the welfare of our Veterans.
Endorsement of the Campaign:  We have received very positive comments of support from our retired very Senior Officers.  They included, Major-General (ret’d) Lewis MacKenzie, Colonel (ret’d) Don Ethell, Commodore (ret’d) David Cogdon, RCMP Deputy Commissioner (ret’d) Larry R. Proke, Mr Bill Gidley, Excecutive Director, RCMP Veterans, Chief Warrant Officer (ret’d) John Marr, former CF Chief Warrant Officer and Chief Petty Officer First Class (ret’d) Joe Fillion, former MARCOM HQ CPO1.  A great number of Senior Officers have clearly supported the initiative that Veterans and Military personnel have been mistreated and that the situation needs to be rectified.  This worthwhile initiative continues to grow; over 85,000 supporters have pronounced their support.   Approximately 450,000 members of the Royal Canadian Legion, The Army Navy and Air Force Veterans (ANAVETS) of Canada (20,000 members), and The Air Force Association in Canada (12,000) adopted resolutions at their Annual General meeting in 2006 in full support of our initiative.   Recently we receive support regarding our Mission from Mrs. Lillian Morgenthau, Founder and President of CARP (Canada’s Association for the 50 plus).  Numerous other Military Associations have declared their support of the Objective.  We have also received the support from Veterans living in 18 Countries.  “Veterans from England, Mexico, Germany, CYQQ Forces, Florida, Warsaw Poland, Syrian Arab Republic, Greece, UK, USA, Cayman Island, Afghanistan, South Africa, Iraq, Thailand, Sarajavo Bosnia, Italy, and Japan.”

Conclusion:  The Government of Canada needs to fairly treat the Veterans and embrace them throughout the year and not only during Remembrance week!  This misguided policy affects Retired and Disabled Veterans.  A simple “White paper” request is required from The Prime Minister of Canada to The Minister of Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) for the needed action and amendment to the “Pension Act” and its policies.  Surplus funds are available in our Military Annuity plan.  It is absolutely ludicrous for members to make separate maximum contributions to three (3) different plans (CFSA, CPP, EI,) and later on in life receive the financial equivalent of one plan.  This injustice levelled at our Veterans some day will affect serving Military personnel and/or members of your family.  Someone will volunteer to serve our Country in the Military!  It should be a concern of all Canadians!

“Veterans are a different Government provider, we were available 24/7, serving far abroad, and we were prepared to give the ultimate sacrifice to our Country.  Our most Senior Decorated Officers support our Mission.   Politicians have exempted themselves from the claw back that would have affected their pensions.  Veterans also deserve to be exempted!”

It has been an Honour and Privilege to serve Canada “Our Country”, and we continue to serve today!

“Veterans want their Golden Years’ Financial Dignity restored!”

Sincerely,
John Labelle
Campaign Coordinator
27 Dresden Court
Lower Sackville, NS
B4C 3X1

 

 

 

 

 

Pension Clawbacks - CF/RCMP/Federal Public Servants

We thought you might be interested in the email below that we sent.  ATV News tonight said that questions submitted by the public would be presented and answered by all the political parties during the upcoming debate.  I don't know if the questions will ALL be answered, but we thought the more people who emailed in on the same topic, the more apt they might be to deal with it.   If we get the word out to all our friends and have them do the same thing, maybe we can get the politicians talking about it.

e-mail questions To:  question@electiondebate08.ca

This topic has been the subject of many debates, introduction of at least one bill from Hon Peter Stoffer (NPD) NS, yet this unfair practice continues.   Despite the fact that all of the subject employees paid into both the CPP and their own Superannuation plan, when they reach age 65, their pension is clawed back considerably.  We understand the background on this and why it started, however, none of the affected people were ever given the choice years ago, when it was decided to follow the formula put into place.  Just as a matter of interest, it is our understanding that members of Parliament are not affected by this clawback.

What do each of the parties plan to do to correct this major injustice?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$30-Billion Pension Surplus

Supporters Of The Military/RCMP Veterans' Campaign Against Pension Reduction At Age 65.

A supreme Court Of Ontario Judge recently ruled that military, RCMP and the public service are not entitled to the $30 billion surplus pension funds that the previous Government Of Canada removed from the pension fund.  This class action suit has been active for this past decade and undoubtedly cost the Public Service Union and Military and RCMP Veterans Associations many millions of dollars in the process; only to receive a judgement in favour of the Government.  The article extracted from the Ottawa Citizen attached below tells the complete story.

Mel Pittman
Web Master
Military And RCMP Veterans'Campaign Web Site
URL: http://users.eastlink.ca/~clawback/
E-Mail: clawback@mail2canada.com

KATHRYN MAY, Ottawa Citizen

Published:  Tuesday, November 20, 2007

An Ontario Supreme Court judge ruled Tuesday that 700,000 public servants, military and RCMP personnel aren't entitled to any of the $30-billion surplus in their pension plans that has been at the centre of a historic legal battle for more than a decade.

Justice de Lobe Panet dealt a devastating blow to the 18 unions and pensioners' groups that had accused the government of "stealing" their pension surplus and turned to the courts to force it to put it back into their accounts.

In a 102-page ruling, the judge rejected their claims and largely accepted the government's argument that the $30 billion at the centre of the dispute is not a real "surplus" of cash or assets, but rather an accounting device to record or monitor the government's liabilities.  The years the surplus exploded showed the government had over-recorded the liabilities it would have to pay in future pensions.

Michele Demers (L), President of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada and John Gordon, National President of the Public Service Alliance of Canada were present at the resumption of the PSAC and PIPSC vs. The Federal Government trial involving the pension surplus grab of $30 billion by the Federal Government.  The trial is expected to last six weeks.   The ruling comes at a time when pensions are top of mind for thousands of baby boomers who are retiring from the public service in record numbers over the next decade.  Some predict the ruling, which suggests the government can do whatever it likes with the pension plan, will prompt a campaign among workers to gain more control over their pension plans.

Judge Panet concluded that the pension accounts weren't "funded" with real assets and the unions failed to prove the accounts had the key characteristics of a trust fund.  With no trust fund, the government couldn't have breached its "fiduciary" obligations, as the unions argued, when it amortized the surplus and used it to offset the deficit between 1990 and 2000.

Even if the unions and pensioners had an interest in the surplus, Judge Panet said the government had the legal authority to take it all when it passed Bill C-78, the legislation that allowed the government in 1999 to claim the surplus and book it against the debt.  The bill also created a new pension fund that is now invested in the market.   The unions had argued that Parliament didn't intend for the government to take the whole surplus, but Judge Panet said Parliament's intent was "clear and unambiguous."

The ruling also dismissed the unions' claims that the provisions of the bill that allowed the government to take the surplus violated the Charter.

The unions and pensioners had long argued they were entitled to at least a portion of the surplus, which was partly built out of their contributions and the interest paid on those premiums.

The government had countered that the pension accounts were simply "ledger sheets" and that the contributions and interest that went into them were merely bookkeeping entries to keep Parliament informed of the cost of providing pensions to workers.  It argued there were no investments, bonds, real estate or other assets in the accounts and all the government owed was its "promise" to pay pensions to all retirees.

"I have found that members of three superannuation plans ... have no equitable interest in the accounts," the judge wrote.  "The claims for breach of trust, for breach of fiduciary duty, and that the (government) breached its obligations to members under the three acts by amortizing the surplus are dismissed."

The case, which went to trial last February, was one of the biggest the government has faced and the stakes were huge.  If the unions were successful, Canadians could have faced billions of dollars added to the country's national debt.

Some argue the decision could set the stage for a protracted battle between the government and its unions over the future of its pension plan.  One of the largest federal unions has already threatened to take the government to court over the right to negotiate pensions at the bargaining table.  The Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, one of the unions involved in the lawsuit, is prepared to challenge the constitutionality of laws that for 40 years have forbidden public servants from bargaining pensions.

The government does not allow unions to bargain pensions, staffing or job classifications on behalf of their members.   The federal pension plan, among the biggest in the world, is managed by the government, which determines benefits.
PIPSC president Michele Demers said the decision hardens the union's resolve to get pensions on the bargaining table.  She said the union is reviewing Judge Panet's decision and is consulting with other unions and pensioners' groups about whether to appeal.  Unions have long been braced for this battle to end up in the Supreme Court.  

"The federal government is the only jurisdiction where unilaterally taking the surplus is legally possible, but so morally and ethically wrong," said Ms. Demers.

Ms. Demers said a recent Supreme Court decision that ruled collective bargaining is a right protected by the Charter has paved the way for a challenge to the Public Service Labour Relations Act, which forbids the bargaining of pensions.

Many have predicted that the ruling could change the face of labour relations in the public sector.

In a case that pitted health unions against British Columbia's labour legislation, the high court threw out sections of a law that essentially allowed the government to tear up union contracts and lay off 8,000 health workers.   The province also later imposed a pay cut on other workers.

"Our members should not be robbed of their pension.  We will make sure this never happens again," Ms. Demers added.  "The Supreme Court in the B.C. health services decision opened the door to include pensions in the collective bargaining process.  We are taking this issue to the bargaining table to make sure our members' rights are never trampled on again," said Ms. Demers.

John Gordon, president of the giant Public Service Alliance of Canada, said he was profoundly disappointed by such a "harsh ruling," but he's not sure his union is ready to follow PIPSC's lead to try to negotiate a new pension deal.

"I'm not sure we're on side with that at this point," said Mr. Gordon.  "The issue of pensions and dealing with the public service superannuation act is very complex and trying to get that on the table could be difficult."

© Ottawa Citizen 2007

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pension Clawback - Second Reading

 

 

Pension Clawback - Debate on Bill C-201

 

 

Debate on Bill C-201

Campaign Supporters

The originator of Bill C-201, Mr Peter Stoffer, MP (NDP) Sackville/Eastern Shore, NS, advises that debate on Bill C-201 in the House of Commons has been scheduled for 17:30 hrs (Ottawa time) on 25th March 2009.  A vote on the subsequent motion will take place sometime during the following 7-10 days.

Supporters can view the process on CPAC, the cable Public Affairs Channel.

Mel Pittman
Webmaster
Roger Boutin
Public Relations
Military and RCMP Veterans´ Campaign
URL:  http://users.eastling.ca/~clawback1/
E-Mail:   clawback@mail2canada.com

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2ndReading




I am please to let you know that my bill (C-201) to eliminate the unfair clawback of retired Canadian Forces and RCMP service pensions will be debated for the second hour in the House of Commons on Tuesday May 12th, 2009 at approximately 5:30 PM Eastern Daylight Saving Time (EDT).  You can watch the debate on CPAC TV or on the Internet via ParlVu.  I am hopeful that this bill will pass second reading and be referred to a committee for further study.  I expect the bill to be voted on the next day (Wednesday May 12th, 2009) immediately before the time provided for Private Members' Business.  (Private Members' Business usually starts at approximately 5:30 PM EDT so the vote would be before this).  Please note however that it is very difficult to give an exact time the vote will take place as it is dependent on the legislative agenda for that day and is always subject to change due to events in the House.  In case you miss the vote on C-201, I will send out a note via email the following day that explains the results.  In advance of the upcoming debate on Bill C-201, I once again encourage you to contact your Member of Parliament to ask them to support this bill.  Thank you again for your interest and support of Bill C-201.  I know that the entire NDP team stands united to correct this injustice on behalf of our veterans and their families.

Sincerely,  Peter Stoffer MP Sackville_Eastern Shore NDP Veterans Affairs Critic.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2ndReading - PASSED


Dear Supporters and Friends,

We are pleased to announce that under the Leadership of Mr Peter Stoffer, MP, the motion of Bill C-201 was carried:   (139 Yeas, 129 Nays)

Thanks to LCOL (ret’d) Jim Lumsden we are able to enclose the listing of MPs who voted on the 2nd reading/vote held in the House of Commons on May 13th, 2009.

In the near future we will send a letter of appreciation to Mr Peter Stoffer, MP, and we will ask Veterans to do the same.

Next on the agenda we will prepare a rebuttal letter to Mr Laurie Hawn, MP, for his shameful presentation against Bill C-201 in the House of Commons on May 12th, 2009.  The above mention information will be translated and forwarded.

This fall a Committee will be formed and Bill C-201 will proceed to be properly evaluated.  Further information will be made available in the near future.

It can no longer be denied that Military/RCMP Veterans where unfairly and unjustly treated, 116 Former Colonels and Generals and 111,000 supporters across 18 Countries have back up our claim!

Sincerely,

John Labelle
Campaign Coordinator
florencejohn@ns.sympatico.ca

Important sites:
www.petitiononline.com/vets8
www.veteranvoice.info

YEAS - 139

  • Allen (Welland)
    		•
  • André
    		•
  • Andrews
    		•
  • Angus
    		•
  • Ashton
    		•
  • Asselin
    		•
  • Atamanenko
    		•
  • Bachand
    		•
  • Bagnell
    		•
  • Bains
    		•
  • Bélanger
    		•
  • Bellavance
    		•
  • Bevington
    		•
  • Bigras
    		•
  • Blais
    		•
  • Bonsant
    		•
  • Bouchard
    		•
  • Bourgeois
    		•
  • Brisson
    		•
  • Brunelle
    		•
  • Byrne
    		•
  • Cannis
    		•
  • Cardin
    		•
  • Carrier
    		•
  • Charlton
    		•
  • Christopherson
    		•
  • Coady
    		•
  • Coderre
    		•
  • Comartin
    		•
  • Cotler
    		•
  • Crête
    		•
  • Crombie
    		•
  • Crowder
    		•
  • Cullen
    		•
  • Cuzner
    		•
  • D'Amours
    		•
  • Davies (Vancouver Kingsway)
    		•
  • Davies (Vancouver East)
    		•
  • DeBellefeuille
    		•
  • Demers
    		•
  • Deschamps
    		•
  • Desnoyers
    		•
  • Dewar
    		•
  • Dhaliwal
    		•
  • Dion
    		•
  • Dorion
    		•
  • Dosanjh
    		•
  • Dryden
    		•
  • Duceppe
    		•
  • Dufour
    		•
  • Duncan (Etobicoke North)
    		•
  • Easter
    		•
  • Eyking
    		•
  • Faille
    		•
  • Foote
    		•
  • Fry
    		•
  • Gagnon
    		•
  • Garneau
    		•
  • Godin
    		•
  • Goodale
    		•
  • Gravelle
    		•
  • Guarnieri
    		•
  • Guay
    		•
  • Guimond (Rimouski-Neigette-Témiscouata-Les Basques)
    		•
  • Guimond (Montmorency-Charlevoix-Haute-Côte-Nord)
    		•
  • Hall Findlay
    		•
  • Harris (St. John's East)
    		•
  • Holland
    		•
  • Hughes
    		•
  • Hyer
    		•
  • Jennings
    		•
  • Julian
    		•
  • Kania
    		•
  • Karygiannis
    		•
  • Kennedy
    		•
  • Laforest
    		•
  • Laframboise
    		•
  • Lalonde
    		•
  • Lavallée
    		•
  • Layton
    		•
  • Leblanc
    		•
  • Lee
    		•
  • Lemay
    		•
  • Leslie
    		•
  • Lévesque
    		•
  • MacAulay
    		•
  • Malhi
    		•
  • Malo
    		•
  • Maloway
    		•
  • Marston
    		•
  • Martin (Esquimalt-Juan de Fuca)
    		•
  • Martin (Winnipeg Centre)
    		•
  • Masse
    		•
  • Mathyssen
    		•
  • McCallum
    		•
  • McKay (Scarborough-Guildwood)
    		•
  • McTeague
    		•
  • Ménard (Hochelaga)
    		•
  • Ménard (Marc-Aurèle-Fortin)
    		•
  • Mendes
    		•
  • Murphy (Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe)
    		•
  • Murphy (Charlottetown)
    		•
  • Murray
    		•
  • Neville
    		•
  • Oliphant
    		•
  • Pacetti
    		•
  • Paillé
    		•
  • Paquette
    		•
  • Patry
    		•
  • Pearson
    		•
  • Plamondon
    		•
  • Pomerleau
    		•
  • Rafferty
    		•
  • Ratansi
    		•
  • Regan
    		•
  • Rodriguez
    		•
  • Rota
    		•
  • Roy
    		•
  • Russell
    		•
  • Savage
    		•
  • Sgro
    		•
  • Siksay
    		•
  • Silva
    		•
  • Simms
    		•
  • Simson
    		•
  • St-Cyr
    		•
  • Stoffer
    		•
  • Szabo
    		•
  • Thi Lac
    		•
  • Thibeault
    		•
  • Tonks
    		•
  • Valeriote
    		•
  • Vincent
    		•
  • Volpe
    		•
  • Wasylycia-Leis
    		•
  • Wilfert
    		•
  • Wrzesnewskyj
    		•
  • Zarac
    		•

     

    NAYS - 129

  • Abbott
    		•
  • Ablonczy
    		•
  • Aglukkag
    		•
  • Albrecht
    		•
  • Allen (Tobique-Mactaquac)
    		•
  • Ambrose
    		•
  • Anderson
    		•
  • Arthur
    		•
  • Ashfield
    		•
  • Baird
    		•
  • Benoit
    		•
  • Bernier
    		•
  • Blackbjurn
    		•
  • Blaney
    		•
  • Block
    		•
  • Boucher
    		•
  • Boughen
    		•
  • Breitkreuz
    		•
  • Brown (Leeds-Grenville)
    		•
  • Brown (Newmarker-Aurora)
    		•
  • Brown (Barrie)
    		•
  • Cadman
    		•
  • Calandra
    		•
  • Carrie
    		•
  • Casson
    		•
  • Chong
    		•
  • Clarke
    		•
  • Clement
    		•
  • Cummins
    		•
  • Davidson
    		•
  • Day
    		•
  • Dechert
    		•
  • Del Mastro
    		•
  • Devolin
    		•
  • Dreeshen
    		•
  • Duncan (Vancouver Island North)
    		•
  • Dykstra
    		•
  • Fast
    		•
  • Finley
    		•
  • Flaherty
    		•
  • Fletcher
    		•
  • Galipeau
    		•
  • Gallant
    		•
  • Glover
    		•
  • Goldring
    		•
  • Goodyear
    		•
  • Gourde
    		•
  • Grewal
    		•
  • Guergis
    		•
  • Harris (Cariboo-Prince George)
    		•
  • Hawn
    		•
  • Hiebert
    		•
  • Hill
    		•
  • Hoback
    		•
  • Hoeppner
    		•
  • Holder
    		•
  • Jean
    		•
  • Kamp (Pitt Meadowsp-Maple Ridge-Mission)
    		•
  • Keddy (South Shore-St. Margaret's)
    		•
  • Kenney (Calgary Southeast)
    		•
  • Kent
    		•
  • Kerr
    		•
  • Kramp (Prince Edward-Hastings)
    		•
  • Lake
    		•
  • Lauzon
    		•
  • Lebel
    		•
  • Lemieux
    		•
  • Lukiwski
    		•
  • Lunn
    		•
  • Lunney
    		•
  • MacKay (Central Nova)
    		•
  • MacKenzie
    		•
  • Mark
    		•
  • Mayes
    		•
  • McColeman
    		•
  • McLeod
    		•
  • Menzies
    		•
  • Merrifield
    		•
  • Miller
    		•
  • Moore (Port Moody-Westwood-Port Coquitlam)
    		•
  • Moore (Fundy Royal)
    		•
  • Nicholson
    		•
  • Norlock
    		•
  • O'Connor
    		•
  • O'Neill-Gordon
    		•
  • Obhrai
    		•
  • Oda
    		•
  • Paradis
    		•
  • Payne
    		•
  • Petit
    		•
  • Poilievre
    		•
  • Prentice
    		•
  • Preston
    		•
  • Pratt
    		•
  • Raitt
    		•
  • Rajotte
    		•
  • Rathgeber
    		•
  • Reid
    		•
  • Richards
    		•
  • Richardson
    		•
  • Rickford
    		•
  • Ritz
    		•
  • Saxton
    		•
  • Scheer
    		•
  • Schellenberger
    		•
  • Shea
    		•
  • Shipley
    		•
  • Shory
    		•
  • Sorenson
    		•
  • Stanton
    		•
  • Storseth
    		•
  • Sweet
    		•
  • Thompson
    		•
  • Tilson
    		•
  • Toews
    		•
  • Trost
    		•
  • Tweed
    		•
  • Uppal
    		•
  • Van Kesteren
    		•
  • Van Loan
    		•
  • Vellacott
    		•
  • Verner
    		•
  • Wallace
    		•
  • Warkentin
    		•
  • Weston (West Vancouver-Sunshine Coast-Sea to Sky Country)
    		•
  • Weston (Saint John)
    		•
  • Wond
    		•
  • Woodworth
    		•
  • Yelich
    		•
  • Young
    		•

    •  

     

     

     

     

     

    Letter to MP Vic Toews





     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Postcard Project


    With the assistance of John Labelle, we recently developed the attached postcard that will serve as a bilingual impact statement upon presentation, in bulk, to Parliament in the near future by Mr Peter Stoffer, MP (NDP).

    All Military and RCMP veterans are asked to print off and distribute the postcard to all of their fellow Veterans, family members, relatives and neighbours alike, soliciting their respective support for our Campaign.

    In order to achieve our aim of generating as much wide spread distribution as we possibly can throughout the Country, supporters should:

    Print off the two attached postcard images, back to back, on thick photographic paper, (9.4) mm or larger - sold at Walmart) and mail it to Mr Stoffer in the form of a postcard.  It may also be printed off on normal printing paper and mailed in an envelope addressed to Mr Stoffer.
    No postage is required as it is addressed to the House of Commons.

    To ensure this project is successful it will need maximum involvement by all supporters of thie Campaign and the postcard should be forwarded to Mr Peter Stoffer as soon as possible.

    Roger Boutin
    Public Relations Coord
    M.R. (Mel) PittmanWebmaster
    Military-RCMP Veteran's Campaign Against
    Pension Clawback at Age 65
    URL:  http://users.eastlink.ca/~clawback1/