Seniors livid over Ruby's Private Members bill
There's a serious grassroots uprising over Ruby Dhalla's new "Pensions for Newcomers" Bill C-428. It's kinda weird getting mass e-mails from seniors... e-based grassroots campaigns aren't the exclusive domain of us young whipper-snappers anymore!
I got an e-mail from an older gentleman who's certainly no fan of me, so the fact that he even sent it to me seeking my help on the issue says something. I recognized some of the names on his initial list, but when I scrolled down, I saw a whole lot of names who'd gotten the e-mail! It doesn't look like any professionally organized campaign... basically, the messages I've seen look like, well, from seniors. They're really disturbed by this new bill.
Basically, Ruby wants pensions for new immigrant seniors to this country, who haven't contributed at all to the system from which they're to reap benefits. I don't know about you, but it strikes me as yet another Liberal attempt to pander for votes. The Liberals have been losing a lot of ground within the immigrant communities, and Ruby's own seat is severely at risk in any upcoming election. So what does she do? She seeks to offer a carrot to voters in her riding to stick with her. Never mind the fact that it will cost taxpayers a whole lot of money, she doesn't care. She, like the typical Liberal she is, is only looking to save her own skin.
As an immigrant to this country, I don't think this bill is fair whatsoever. If someone's family has been pushing to bring their parents from overseas under the family re-unification category of the Immigration system, then they should be fully prepared to support those family members... they shouldn't then be turning to the government and say "Okay, now I've finally got my family here, now I need your help to support them too."
Doesn't that just strike you as being WRONG? But of course it wouldn't to the "Culture of Entitlement" folks like Ruby in the Liberal Party of Canada. Yet another reason why we need to crush the Red Beast.
I got an e-mail from an older gentleman who's certainly no fan of me, so the fact that he even sent it to me seeking my help on the issue says something. I recognized some of the names on his initial list, but when I scrolled down, I saw a whole lot of names who'd gotten the e-mail! It doesn't look like any professionally organized campaign... basically, the messages I've seen look like, well, from seniors. They're really disturbed by this new bill.
Basically, Ruby wants pensions for new immigrant seniors to this country, who haven't contributed at all to the system from which they're to reap benefits. I don't know about you, but it strikes me as yet another Liberal attempt to pander for votes. The Liberals have been losing a lot of ground within the immigrant communities, and Ruby's own seat is severely at risk in any upcoming election. So what does she do? She seeks to offer a carrot to voters in her riding to stick with her. Never mind the fact that it will cost taxpayers a whole lot of money, she doesn't care. She, like the typical Liberal she is, is only looking to save her own skin.
As an immigrant to this country, I don't think this bill is fair whatsoever. If someone's family has been pushing to bring their parents from overseas under the family re-unification category of the Immigration system, then they should be fully prepared to support those family members... they shouldn't then be turning to the government and say "Okay, now I've finally got my family here, now I need your help to support them too."
Doesn't that just strike you as being WRONG? But of course it wouldn't to the "Culture of Entitlement" folks like Ruby in the Liberal Party of Canada. Yet another reason why we need to crush the Red Beast.
posted by Christian Conservative @ 9:11 a.m.
11 Comments:
At Mon Sep 28, 10:59:00 a.m. EDT,
Oxford County Liberals said…
Gee.. nice attempt at manufactured outrage there, CC. This is a private members bill - private members bills rarely get anywhere. Second, this is a private members bill from an opposition politician - not the government - see prior comment X 2.
Thirdly, the Liberals don't whip on their members private members bill.
Bottom Line: this bill has almost no chance of even getting introduced - much less passing.
Perhaps if you're actually getting letters from people, you might put aside some of your partisanship and point those salient facts out to them (I won't hold my breath on you ceasing your attempt at manufacturing outrage over this to be impartial, but one can always hope).
At Mon Sep 28, 11:06:00 a.m. EDT,
Brian said…
... and so they should be LIVID !!!
My late mother-in-law experienced this first hand. Recent senior "arrival" immigrants were jumping the queue for assisted housing , and getting government financial assistance not available to Canadian seniors who had contributed taxes all their lives !
At Mon Sep 28, 12:29:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
You bet we're mad. The OAS is completely clawed back from seniors with a moderate income (53K), so we don't get it! Why should they?
At Mon Sep 28, 01:05:00 p.m. EDT,
Christian Conservative said…
Actually Scott, that's exactly what I did several days ago when I got the original letter.
I'm only posting this because it made National Newswatch's front page today.
At Mon Sep 28, 01:19:00 p.m. EDT,
Frances said…
Actually, Anon, OAS isn't clawed back until after net income (line 234) is over $64,718. It's the age amount which is clawed back beginning at $31,524 and completely gone at $66,697. OAS is totally clawed back at $105,266.
Immigrants do qualify for OAS after they have been here a certain number of years. Service Canada provides the info. However, they then qualify for the Guaranteed Income Supplement, which makes up for the OAS. I am not certain as to the qualifications for the GIS.
Regardless, immigrants who have never worked in Canada and paid taxes to the system can collect.
At Mon Sep 28, 02:57:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
Anon you have got your figures mixed up re clawback, the following is the clawback figures..
You may of heard of the OAS clawback before, but how does it really work? It’s basically a tax on high income seniors in the form of reduced old age security benefits. If you’re 65 or older in 2009, the government will clawback 15% of income over $66,335. Old age security will be completely eliminated for incomes over $107,692. Having said that there is no way we should be lowering the 10 year term, if someone is in this range he/she wold only be getting 10/40, or 25% of the full pension, still too much....argee
At Mon Sep 28, 03:16:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
The problem for the Liberal's right now Scott is that it was in NN. So is the Coderre thing. Why would she be allowed to even think of introducing this when the floor is crumbling out from beneath the LPC? It would never pass and we all know that, but, its justs one more nail into a public perception. Whats wrong with a meeting with Ruby explaining how this will be perceived by Canadians before she introduced it?
And that's the issue..Coderre makes the LPC look leaderless and Ruby makes the LPC look like desperate MP's willing to do anything to keep a job and a pension regardless of the cost to Canada. I know it aint true, but, that's what it looks like. billg
At Mon Sep 28, 04:06:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
And who is sitting at Miss Ruby's feet today?
At Mon Sep 28, 05:31:00 p.m. EDT,
Anonymous said…
Hey Frances, I think your clawback figures may be from 2008. The qualification for GIS is earning centred. Depending on the circustances of the applicant, married, single, widow, or widower. All of the applicants income is taken into consideration, the less you make the more you get to a maximum sum, so conversely, the more you make the less you get until you hit the maximum top figure then you no longer qualify for GIS according to your circumstances married, single, etc. I hope this helps to clear up the OAS, GIC thing.....argee
At Mon Sep 28, 07:37:00 p.m. EDT,
maryT said…
This might be a Private members bill now, but will it be a campaign promise.
At Tue Sep 29, 09:39:00 p.m. EDT,
maryT said…
It is not just seniors who are furious. Spent the morning at the dentist with a g/son and everyone was talking about this and saying no way. And other than myself, the rest (10 staff and 4 patients) were under 40.
Post a Comment
<< Home