Seniors issues and pensions

Subscribe to Seniors issues and pensions
Ottawa – Quatre-vingt-six pourcent (86%) des familles Canadiennes ne bénéficieront en rien du fractionnement du revenu que le gouvernement fédéral entend mettre en place selon une étude publiée aujourd’hui par le Centre canadien de politiques alternatives (CCPA).
OTTAWA—Eighty-six percent of Canadian families would gain no benefit from the proposed Conservative income splitting plan, says a new study released today by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA).
This study examines the cost and the distributional impact of three income splitting scenarios: pension income splitting; income splitting for families with children under 18, as the Conservatives have pledged; and income splitting for all families. The study finds that the impact of income splitting in all scenarios is very unequal and the lost revenue for Canadian governments would be substantial.
Inside this issue: The Ombudsperson’s Report on Seniors Care: A Brief Analysis of the Government’s (Non)Response by Marcy Cohen and Janine Farrell Are we undermining our schools by not investing enough in education? by Iglika Ivanova BC’s GHG targets and LNG: not compatible by Marc Lee BC’s public sector pensions plans need to divest from fossil fuels by Marc Lee Are big-five forest firms about to get a windfall? by Ben Parfitt
Canada's economic development model is on a collision course with the urgent need for global climate action. Worldwide, extreme weather events from drought to floods to powerful storms and record-breaking temperatures are making a powerful statement that climate change can no longer be denied.
In the microcosm of our daily lives, many Canadians make politically-conscious choices about what to buy. Whether it’s drinking fair trade tea or coffee, using eco-friendly cleaning products, eating locally-produced food, avoiding clothes made in sweatshops, or refusing to buy war-toys for their kids, many Canadians are voting with their pocketbooks.
The grand debate between defined benefit (DB) and defined contribution (DC) models has dominated the pension discourse in labour relations for most of the last two decades.
On April 27, 2012 in Halifax, the Community Coalition to End Poverty - Nova Scotia and the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives - Nova Scotia Office partnered to present a lecture on Canada's public pension system.  The lecture featured economic consultant and specialist in public pension policy, Monica Townson, who explains how the Canadian pension system works, why it's considered to be in crisis, and the implications of recent changes to the system proposed by the government. Listen to the full lecture below.
Old Age Security is the basic building block of Canada’s retirement income system. It is a flat-rate monthly benefit that goes to everyone at age 65, provided they meet certain residency requirements. Canadians build on that foundation, saving for their retirement with benefits from the Canada or Quebec Pension Plan, a workplace pension if they’re lucky enough to have one, along with private savings.
It is argued by some that eligibility for Old Age Security (OAS) and the Guaranteed Income Supplement (GIS) at age 65 discourages older Canadians from remaining in the workforce, and that we need to keep them working longer to avoid  present and future labour shortages and a sharp rise in the so-called “dependency” ratio (the ratio of retirees to the working-age population). Accordingly, the federal government proposes to phase-in an increase in the age of eligibility from age 65 to age 67, affecting Canadians who are now 54 and younger.