Thunder Bay Classifieds - PeopleField.org - classifieds housing vehicles and job site


	Your local, Canadian , community classifieds and forums
	Thunder Bay (Ontario) (change)	Search

nav bar:Classifieds \| Community Directory \| Your Account \| About/Help \| Home General Classifieds (all) .....Cars, Trucks, Vehicles▶ .....For Sale▶ .....Local Services▶ Add a Classified FREE Motorcycles/Accessories ( all Cars, Trucks, Vehicles ) Bicycles ( all For Sale ) Computer Consultant ( all Local Services ) Thunder Bay Forum Ontario Forum Canadian Forum Poetry Canada PeopleField Support Forum Post a New Topic Tagwall of Posts Random 5 Threads About Us Active and Local Frequent Questions (FAQ) Posting and Use Guidelines Scam Prevention TOS, Editing and Banning Sponsorship Contact / Feedback --- Log In / Register --- It's Free! --- New profile options --- when logged in! --- Click Here! List Directories (all) Automotive▶ Shopping & Supplies▶ Hot Directory Listings! (ALL) Add your Business, Club or Organization FREE 1 Newest Listings▶ For Sale: Boats, Motorcycles, RVs & Other Sporting Goods Toys, Games & Hobbies Bicycle Engines by Chris Hill Thunder Bay homepage Change City Change Country

New to PeopleField! Want a little info about this site? :: log in
NEW ADDITION: Community Directory - click here to add your business, club or organization!

Forum Index > Provincial > Ontario Forum

Petition to unlock locked in pensions (87 posts)

: <--back : Showing posts 61 to 80 : Next 7--> :
OR jump to page: 1 2 3 4 5

Report/Tag This Thread!

chub111
Active Member Registered	Dear Bill, I am pleased to be writing this letter in support of unlocking the pensions of those Ontarians with LIF, LIRA, and LRIF pension holdings. My colleague Andrea Horwath, the NDP Pension Critic introduced a private members bill in the last legislature that would have allowed seniors to withdraw up to 100 per cent of their locked-in pension funds. I strongly believe that this is legislation that needs to be reintroduced and acted upon by the legislature as soon as possible after the October 10th election. Seniors want the right to access and control their own money, and deserve to have that option. People should not have to wait until age 90 to access the full amount of their pension funds, to limit access to 6.2 percent of principal, in an era when so much talk is being bandied about around choice for seniors, is simply ridiculous. Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and New Brunswick and the federal government have already changed their laws to enable older adults to access some, or all, of their locked in pension, but in Ontario, only a select number of MPPs have the freedom to unlock their pensions. This is wrong. It isn't fair, and is something I want to see changed. Some people may question if a 25 year old understands the importance of this issue, but with my own parents approaching retirement age, I understand this issue not only from a political perspective but also from the personal perspective of my own family. Allowing access to the principal in locked-in funds is the fair thing to do for Ontarians especially since a precedent was set in 1999 under the Conservative government with Bill 27 when 61 MPPs were permitted to do so.. For MPPs to give themselves the right to access that is denied to everyone else is wrong. I look forward to working in Queen's Park to set it right. Sincerely, Stephen Maynard NDP candidate London-Fanshawe
quote / posted 14 September 2007 6:50 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Good Morning All, As some of you may or may not be aware as yet, Philip James has secured a one hour time slot on the Bill Kelly Talk Show at radio station CHML Hamilton 900 on the AM band at 11am on Wednesday Sept. 19th. The broadcast will be streamed live and can be heard on the Internet at http://www.900chml.com . Philip & Ken Elliott will be participating together as Billy Kelly's guests. Over the last few days, we've been working together gathering material and discussing topics and various strategies in preparation for the program. The topics will be around the various locked-in pensions issue and hopefully they will be able to provide the listeners with a clear realization of what a locked-in pension is, if any of the listeners in fact do have one that don't yet even realize that they do, the consequences and limitations of locked-in pensions, the current political parties position regarding unlocking these pensions, the hypocritical position and silence from the current Liberal government and of the real truth and discrimination behind Bill 27 and the select 61 MPP's who cleverly and deceitfully created legislation to bypass the very rules they continue to impose on Ontarians today. Hopefully as time permits, they will be able to get most of this material out to the listeners and create enough of a buzz among the voters who can then decide how important an issue locked-in pensions really are for themselves and how they detrimentally affect not only the current holders of LIF's and LRIF's but also the continually growing number of employees with LIRA's resulting from their employers DC type pension plans. I will make every attempt to record the interview and create a copy of the program in an audio file and distribute it to those who want a copy, subject to the radio station's permission. Please feel free to pass this on to all of your own set of contacts within your respective areas. The more listeners, the better chance to get the message out. Regards, Grant Fleury Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders
quote / posted 17 September 2007 3:15 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	MEDIA ADVISORY/INVITATION CARP FIGHTS FOR COMPLETE ACCESS TO LOCKED-IN-FUNDS FOR ALL ONTARIANS BY AGE 65 Proposed policy will enhance equity and quality of life for LIF holders Toronto, Ontario, September 19, 2007 – On Wednesday, September 26, at 10:30 a.m., Canada's Association for the 50 Plus (CARP) will hold a press conference to urge the Ontario government to unlock LIFs for all Ontario LIF holders. CARP, in conjunction with the Ontario Coalition of Independent Locked-in-Fund Holders (OCILFH), proposes that 50 per cent of the principal in a LIF should be unlocked at age 55, with an additional 50 per cent unlocked at age 65. 450,000 Ontario LIF holders are seeking equity with the 61 Ontario MPPs who were allowed to unlock their LIFs; CARP urges the government to follow the example of Saskatchewan which has unlocked LIFs 100 per cent. When: Wednesday September 26, 2007 @ 10:30am Where: CARP'S National office, 27 Queen Street East, Suite 1307, Toronto, corner Victoria. Who: Speakers will include preeminent tax expert, Professor Jack Mintz, leading actuary Malcolm Hamilton, Dr. W. Gleberzon, CARP's Director of Government Relations, with a message from financial author and publisher, Gordon Pape. Personal testimony by LIF holders will also be presented. Contact: Michelle Taylor at 416-363-8748 ext. 236 or at m.taylor@50plus.com
quote / posted 21 September 2007 2:19 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Response to a Article in the Star.com -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi All; This letter is in response to a article that was read in thestar.com Ontario Election , Drawing the line on campaign attack ads. Good evening to all Liberals who seem to think it is honourable to tell less than the whole truth. Your collective silence as Liberal Party members on the issue of locked-in pensions is despicable!!!!!!!!!! In the article below, Ben Chin, Liberal campaign spokesperson is once again only telling part of the truth, while hiding the whole truth as it relates to the Ontario Liberal Party. (See the 4th and 5th last paragraph of this article.) As you are well aware Mr. Brown, Mr. Kwinter, Mr. Bradley, Mr. Ruprecht, Mr. Patten, Mr. Phillips, Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Sorbara, there were 20 Liberals in all who received the same financial opportunity that Howard Hampton and Shelley Martel received courtesy of Bill 27, An Act To Amend The Pension Benefits Act And The MPPs Pension Act. Each of you received the same privilege as did Hampton and Martel. In fact your former colleague, Sean Conway (also a recipienet of the same privilege as Hampton and Martel) said in the House (see Hansard for Monday December 13, 1999) about Bill 27 ... " I want to make it plain. No one benefits more from this change than I do. It's a wrong thing for me to support. I would go even further and say it's immoral." As for you Mr. Bradley, Minister Responsible for Seniors, your complete silence on this issue, while hundreds of thousands of your constituency (seniors holding locked-in pensions) suffer under the disgusting confines imposed by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario, is abhorrent. I don't know how you can live with yourself! Is there even one Liberal party member with the guts to stand up and tell the honest truth about Bill 27, even as it relates to the Liberal Party. So far there hasn't been one individual with that integrity. STUDENTS SPEAK OUT Kerry Gillespie Queen's Park Bureau Like most teenagers, Xing Chiu watches television. What's unusual is that she's particularly interested in the political ads and in reading what the various leaders have to say about their plans for Ontario. But in an era of negative campaigning, she's often disappointed. Instead of learning about what each party will do, more often than not, she finds out just how much they dislike what the others are up to. "Recently, Progressive Conservative Leader John Tory accused Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty of being `the worst promise breaker of modern times.' At what point, or is there a point, where we draw the line between actually campaigning (on policies) and plain accusing and humiliating opponents?" asked Chiu, a 17-year-old student North Toronto Collegiate. "You do draw the line ... you don't engage in nasty name calling," Tory said when the Star asked Chiu's question. "To say someone is the greatest promise breaker in modern times, there's a bit of a tongue-in-cheek aspect to that ... but I'm trying to make a serious point," Tory said. "The nature of some of the broken promises is unprecedented and it's a huge issue in this election if you believe as I do that you have to have credibility and trust in order to govern and lead effectively. "But I will admit ... finding that balance between discussing your opponent's record and putting forward your own is a difficult challenge. But I really try." There's a reason parties resort to bashing their opponents in the media and in paid negative ads, said Nelson Wiseman, University of Toronto political science professor. "Some work, some blow up in your face, but for the most part (negative ads) do work and that's why parties use them," Wiseman said. Last week, the NDP launched its first television ad. But rather than tell about its policies, all it does is bash McGuinty and his policies. Often, it's not the party leader throwing the dirtiest mud. Yesterday, within minutes of NDP Leader Howard Hampton promising to roll back the 25 per cent pay hike MPPs gave themselves last year, McGuinty's staff had sent reporters an email titled: "Troubling questions on Howard Hampton's rich rhetoric." "When Mike Harris eliminated the MPP pension plan, Howard Hampton and his wife, Shelley Martel, were handed a near $1 million payout. Pretty easy to talk about pay cuts when you're sitting on a million-dollar nest egg, isn't it?" Liberal campaign spokesperson Ben Chin wrote. Chiu, senior vice-president on her school's student council, knows a little about election campaigning. "Campaigning means selling yourself, not degrading your opponents," Chiu said. "I guess it's unavoidable in a provincial-level election to point out your opponents' flaws to boost your own popularity, but when opponent-bashing is the basis of one's campaign ... both parties lose credibility," she said. PLEASE NOTE: John Tory and the Progressive Conservative Party have endorsed 100% unlocking of pension funds (LIFs, LRIFs, etc.), 50% at age 55 and 50% at age 65. The NDP endorsed unlocking of pension funds as MPP Andrea Horwath introduced private members bill #175 to unlock 100% of pension funds. The Liberals offered a insulting 25% unlocking in their 2007 budget.
quote / posted 24 September 2007 8:38 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All; I just found this it was posted today. NEWS RELEASE JOSH PRINGLE PC CANDIDATE SAULT STE. MARIE ************************ A John Tory government will protect seniors PC Leader John Tory said a PC government will give Ontarians 100 percent access to their locked-in pension income. This would mean seniors and retirees would have access to 50 percent of their pension at age 55 and the remaining 50 percent at age 65. In Dalton McGuinty's Ontario, pensions are locked-in by the government as late as age 90 and the most any senior can hope to access from their pension savings is one out of every four dollars. Tory indicated that when the Ontario Expert Commission on Pensions reports back in the summer of 2008, he will move quickly to implement its recommendations. “We can, and must, do more for our senior citizens,” Mr. Tory concluded. “This means adopting policies that put fairness for seniors first. Our seniors have done so much to make Ontario what it is today. In order to repay that debt, leadership matters.” John Tory has cited comments made in March 2007 by Dr. Jack Mintz of the University of Toronto calling for Ontario to unlock the chains put on pension savings of employees who change jobs or retire. According to Mintz, unlocking locked-in pensions would help contribute to labour mobility, better retirement plans and ultimately, a stronger economy. “Seniors and retirees built the foundation for the strong community and Ontario we know today. They deserve to have control over their hard-earned retirement savings,” said Pringle. “We believe that Ontarians know best how to look after their money– not government.” “Our plan will allow seniors and retirees to have control over their own money and better plan for retirement based on their own needs,” said Pringle. “Ontario's pension regulations present unnecessary challenges for seniors and retirees looking to transform a lifetime of hard work into financial freedom.” Pringle added: “This is a simple change to Ontario's pension rules with no cost to the taxpayer. Unlike Dalton McGuinty, who is only willing to provide seniors and retirees with partial access to their locked in pension funds, a John Tory PC government will respect the wishes of these individuals to manage their money as they see fit.” In the 2007 budget, Dalton McGuinty responded to seniors and retirees concerns about this issue by proposing a plan that would give Ontarians access to 25 percent of locked-in accounts at the earliest retirement date of the pension plan from which the money was transferred and 100 percent access at age 90. To date, no regulations or legislation have been brought forward to enact these proposed changes. “Leadership is about listening to seniors and retirees," said Pringle. "If we are going to remove the barriers and give the people of our community the fairness and peace of mind they deserve, then leadership matters." Ontario PC Leader John Tory also today detailed the Progressive Conservative plan to protect senior citizens and other vulnerable homeowners struggling with rising property assessments and unduly restrictive pension structures. “Today, many seniors are struggling to make ends meet. They are penalized by a property assessment system that punishes people on fixed incomes most of all,” John Tory said. “Dalton McGuinty has failed to show real leadership on Ontario's assessment crisis. Too many seniors are on the verge of being forced out of their own homes.” John Tory said his government will take aim at the current municipal property tax assessment system, which is facing a “crisis of credibility” according to the Ontario Ombudsman. The average assessed home in Ontario recently rose from $179,151 in the 2003 taxation year to $232,883 in the 2006 taxation year. Some assessment increases have been as high as 150 percent, and homeowners are receiving assessments that contain incorrect information about their properties. A John Tory government will provide stability to homeowners by: - Establishing a five percent annual cap on property assessment increases for as long as a person owns his or her home (including if the property is transferred to a spouse). - Implementing a new reverse onus appeal system so the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) will have to justify an assessment increase. - Ensuring MPAC fully implements the recommendations of the Ombudsman, and if the serious problems he identified are not addressed, shutting down MPAC and building a better system. - Addressing rural assessment inequities which currently penalize farmers who have been encouraged to have value-added production services. PLEASE NOTE: John Tory and the Progressive Conservative Party have endorsed 100% unlocking of pension funds (LIFs, LRIFs, etc.), 50% at age 55 and 50% at age 65. The NDP endorsed unlocking of pension funds as MPP Andrea Horwath introduced private members bill #175 to unlock 100% of pension funds. The Liberals offered a insulting 25% unlocking in their 2007 budget.
quote / posted 26 September 2007 9:31 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Statement from Conference -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi All; This is a statement from our conference. It was quite a success. As i get caught up with everything that has been happening I will try and post some of it. We are definitely gaining momentum. Regards Bill C Good Morning and thank you for allowing us the opportunity to speak to you today. The Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders is composed of a number of private citizens assembled from various regions in Ontario who's sole purpose is to lobby the government to unlock all "locked-in" pensions in our province. We are primarily arguing two issues within one campaign. The primary issue is that of fairness and equality under one law for all Ontario citizens regardless of vocation and void of political favouritism. The secondary issue is that of the unjust government control of Ontarians access to their own personal locked-in pension assets. Assets that were generally derived from former employers "wound-up" defined benefit plans and employers defined contribution plans. Regarding the primary issue, the current rules and regulations set out in the Pension Benefits Act are discriminatory, as theyre not equally applied to all Ontarians. The MPPs pension assets, derived from their former wound-up pension plan in 1995, fall under the jurisdiction of the MPPs Pension Act, thus the discrimination. Two separate Acts for the same type of locked-in pensions. Discrimination? YES, there are currently 61 MPP's, both former and present, that through a deceitful amendment to the MPP Pensions Act, cloaked within Bill 27 in 1999, exempted themselves from the highly restrictive and paternalistic legislation that governs all other Ontarians LIRA's, LIF's and LRIF's. Regarding the secondary issue, the yearly maximum withdrawal limits for those who meet the minimum age requirement (usually 55) for access to their locked-in LIF and LRIF pensions is approximately 6.5%, increasing slightly year after year, until either age 80 if it's a LIF or age 90 if it's an LRIF. The aforementioned 61 MPP's have 100% access! The zenith of discrimination! YES, 100% unrestricted access to the same type of pension-derived locked-in assets as compared to the rest of all other Ontarians 6.5%! Outright inequality and double standard. Two separate laws for the same type of pension. One for 61 MPP's and one for an estimated million plus other Ontarians. Our Coalition is dead set against such inequality and blatant discrimination. Discrimination and silence since 1999 that continues to percolate within the ruling Liberal party. We are demanding fair and equal treatment and insist on being included in this exclusive group of 61 privileged Ontarians by receiving the same 100% access to our locked-in pensions. According to our research, there were Sixty-one (61) MPPs, across all three parties that benefited from this immorally and selfishly conceived piece of legislation consisting of 22 PCs, 19 NDP and 20 Liberals. The names of these 61 MPPs are known to the Coalition as they were derived, with reasonable assurance, from the Ontario Legislature Hansard. This legislation, quietly kept from the public and cleverly tucked away within Bill 27, only unlocked their locked-in pensions, while leaving all other Ontarians behind. For the past four years, Premiere Dalton McGuinty, Finance minister Greg Sorbara and Seniors minister Jim Bradley have continued to ignore the pleas of Ontarians begging for full access to their locked-in pensions, while specific members within their party, hypocritically, continue to have full 100% access to their own former locked-in pensions. In the recent Liberal budget back in March, Greg Sorbara introduced a one time 25% unlocking option to hopefully appease the holders of locked-in pensions. This was an insult to all Ontarians and continues to fly in the face of democracy, and equality under one law for all. In 2002, Saskatchewan listened to the will of their people and eliminated these restrictions, granting full 100% access to all locked-in pensions through legislation that applied to ALL their residents, and not just their provincial politicians. Their belief was that their residents know best how and when to use their own private pension assets. In December of 2006, Andrea Horwath of the NDP, introduced Bill 175 to unlock all locked-in pensions in Ontario receiving verbal support in the legislature from Bob Runciman of the PCs. Predictably and true to their ignorance towards seniors locked-in pensions, the Liberal party ignored this bill and instead went on to introduce and pass a bill for themselves that essentially granted all MPPs a 35% pay raise. During the current campaign in a press release and public appearance in July, the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party, John Tory committed to unlocking all locked-in pensions 100% if elected, citing that "Ontarians know best how to look after their money, not government". Our goal here today is to create an awareness of these two issues within the general public. A public who for the most part, have no idea about the restrictions they will face when they qualify to withdraw their hard earned locked-in pension assets and who further and more importantly have no idea of the hypocritically conceived legislation that was created by politicians, for politicians, leaving the rest of Ontario shackled and begging for equal access to their own pension money. We encourage you to support the parties in the upcoming election that will unlock pensions 100% for ALL Ontarians and not just a select few as was done in 1999. Thank you for your time and allowing us the opportunity to speak to you about this extremely important issue affecting the quality and standard of living for the estimated million plus locked-in pension holders in the province of Ontario. Sincerely, Grant Fleury Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders The Principals in the Coalition contact information is listed below; Bill Costello: banjo6@baytel.net Bill Nafziger: nafjbg@perth.net Ken Elliott: kenneth.elliott@sympatico.ca Philip James: philipajames@rogers.com Anna Pollock: beachers2@yahoo.com Bill Foan: wfoan@storm.ca Grant Fleury: gjfleury@sympatico.ca
quote / posted 28 September 2007 6:56 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All; Rick Bartolucci took a cheep shot in the Sudbury Debate and this is a comment to Mr. Bartolucci. Mr. Bartolucci in his shameful attempt to discredit his inexperienced opposition, cites the fact that Mr. Hampton, while disrespectfully referring to him as "Howie Hampton", received a $550, 000 pension buyout, hypocritically fails to include the 20 members of his own Liberal party who also received amounts far in excess of the $550, 000 collected by Mr. Hampton. That's right! Twenty members of his own party, including McGuinty, Sorbara, Conway, Bradley, Ramsey etc... all received the same or similar amounts! With that shot Mr. Bartolucci, you have reached the all-time zenith of hypocrisy. It's too bad your opponents didn't know anything about it, otherwise I'm sure you would have kept your little secret to yourself as you've done now for the last eight years.What a shameful cheap shot! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Mr. Bartolucci, besides being pompous in his attitude towards his opponents and his constituents, in his usual style fails to "tell the truth - the whole truth..." and include his own party members as recipients of this gross amount of taxpayers money. Yes taxpayers money as well, because in order for all of them to get their pension buyouts, including his own Liberal brethren, the taxpayers of Ontario had to pay the 10 to 20 million dollar shortfall for the buyout to be completed. Further he also fails to inform you all that this special unprecedented buyout was only created by the government for 61 MPP's while all other Ontarians were left out of this special little privilege. That's right, the Liberals, including Mr. Bartolucci, so very eloquent in opposition to this financial largesse, have done nothing to include the rest of all Ontarians in this exclusive unfettered benefit. That's right again, 61 MPP's amongst us are walking around quietly with full access to their pensions while the million other Ontarians with the same types of pension assets are struggling year after year with a mere 6.5% access! So yes, Rick, why don't you you tell the public the truth - the whole truth and then maybe you won't be so smug when the audience and the public hears how much of a hypocrite you are. Regards,Grant Fleury, SudburyOntario Coalition of Independent LIF Holderslocked_pensions_gf@yaho o.ca
quote / posted 30 September 2007 9:39 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Media Conference Summary -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Good afternoon, Wednesday, September the 26th in Toronto at the CARP headquarters, a media conference took place that included notable financial economics experts Jack Mintz and Malcolm Hamilton, Bill Gleberzon of CARP, members of our Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders, reporters from various media organizations and other interested parties. Bill Gleberzon of CARP, head of CARP's campaign to unlock pensions, hosted the event and presented a comprehensive summary of the locked-in pensions, the 61 MPP's with full 100% access, the invited speakers and the current status of the political parties position. A number of items relating to the unlocking of pensions in our province and various rationale for unlocking locked-in pensions was discussed at length by the participants. A message of support for unlocking locked-in pensions, written by renowned financial expert Gordon Pape (although unable to attend), was read on his behalf. Our two attending Coalition members, Bill Nafziger and Philip James, gave examples of the hardships and limitations affecting them as a direct result of holding one of these restrictive locked-in pensions as well as a number of other stories of hardships being encountered by Ontario residents that are currently in possession of locked-in pensions. They were very well received and as a direct result, one of their stories is featured in today's TheStar.com. The article can be accessed on the internet at; http://www.thestar.com/News/article/260918 Another article has also been written today in the Financial Post by Jonathan Chevreau under the banner "The Wealthy Boomer" based on an interview with Malcolm Hamilton and can be accessed at; http://communities.canada.com/financ...-pensions.aspx Philip James read our Coalition statement that I wrote on behalf of the members of our Coalition. It can be found on the internet using google and searching for "Coalition of Independent LIF Holders". We are encouraging every Ontarian who is currently in possession of a LIRA, LIF or LRIF, (essentially a form of a locked-in pension) to lobby your MPP and the candidates in your local riding to unlock all "locked-in" pensions 100% thus allowing you to decide for yourself how to manage your own pension money. Remember this is not government money - it's yours - 100% of it. You must demand to have the same right to manage it as you see fit, as was created for 61 MPP's by MPP's in 1999. Yes, they already have 100% access to their former "wound-up" pension through an amendment to provincial legislation they exclusively created for themselves in December of 1999. All other Ontarians do not have this privilege! We are also encouraging every Ontarian who is currently receiving some form of pension benefit from your employer to take heed of the future limitations you will face if you are forced to have your company pension benefit transferred to a "locked-in" retirement account due to layoff, termination, company closure or similar event that creates such an occurrence. Although this may not be on the minds of the younger workforce since retirement is far into the future, changing the legislation to have these "locked-in" retirement accounts (LIRA's) unlocked at age 55 is as equally important for the younger workforce as it is for those who are currently at the qualified retirement age (usually 55), since they too will one day be in a similar position once they reach retirement age. The campaign to have these pensions unlocked for those now with LIF's and LRIF's (created from the aforementioned LIRA's) today is extremely important as it greatly affects the quality of retirement they will have if access to their locked-in pension is increased to 100% as 61 MPP's in 1999 did for themselves. Yes, there are 61 elite Ontarians amongst us that enjoy a benefit that is not available to you! The Liberals have introduced a one time 25% unlock option in January of 2008 in an attempt to appease the holders of locked-in pensions. We believe this to be a hypocritical insult to all Ontarians while twenty of Premiere McGuinty's Liberals, past and present, continue to enjoy 100% access for themselves! They continue to support this hypocrisy by allowing two acts to exist, with dramatically different access provisions, governing the exact same type of pension derived assets. One act (MPP Pension Benefits Act) governing and granting themselves 100% access and the other act (Ontario Pension Benefits Act) governing the rest of all other Ontarians allowing a paltry 6.5% yearly access! The NDP, although as of today quiet on this issue in their campaign, had introduced a bill (Bill 175) in December of 2006 to unlock pensions 100% as well. The PC's are the only party to date that have publicly committed to 100% unlocking since their July 5th public announcement and continue to highlight this in their campaign, if elected. Saskatchewan, in 2002, became a leader in respecting the rights of their residents to manage their own pension money and unlocked all locked-in pensions for ALL their residents, not just their provincial politicians. Ontario stubbornly continues on with their repressive, regressive and discriminatory policies pertaining to locked-in pensions for all Ontarians, with the exception of the 61 MPP's of 1999. We encourage you to exercise your rights and let your voice be heard in the upcoming provincial election and vote for the party that will unlock locked-in pensions 100% as was done for the 61 MPP's in 1999. Our Coalition will accept nothing less than 100% unlocking, as was done in Saskatchewan, and parity with our own 61 MPP's of 1999! Thank you, Grant Fleury Ontario Coalition of Independent LIF Holders
quote / posted 30 September 2007 4:03 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	A FREE VOTE Hi All; This is a letter I just received. Regards Bill C There has been a lot of discussion in the media and by the other political parties about bringing faith-based schools into the public education system. The John Tory campaign wanted to make sure you were aware of additional details John Tory provided today on this issue as part of his speech to the Economic Club of Toronto. In John's own words,“If I have the privilege of serving as Premier, I will strike a commission, consult with the public, create pilot projects, and place a bill before the [Ontario] Legislature. But that bill will only proceed with the support of the people, through their elected representatives. MPPs will be allowed a free vote, so they are at liberty to vote their conscience and represent the wishes of their constituents. In this significant way, the public can be more involved in the decision making.” To be clear: John Tory is allowing all of his MPPs to have a free vote in the Legislature on this issue when it comes before them in two – three years. This means that they will all be able to vote based on their own conscience and the wishes of their constituents. In the meantime, over the next year or so, a commission to study the issue will be conducted. Then, appropriate pilot projects will be conducted. Then, a committee of the Legislature will review and study the work of the commission. And, after that two – three year process, members of the Legislature will have a free vote so they can reflect the wishes of their constituents. John Tory will vote for it, but, PC MPPs will be free to vote as they see fit. John Tory has been open and honest about his views and the motivation behind them. He has been clear today, before the election, that there will be a free vote for MPPs and he has always had the same position in public as he has had in private on this issue. John Tory continues to be the only provincial party leader offering real leadership for Ontario. Through strengthening and modernizing health care, getting rid of 'catch and release' justice, providing real assistance for our farmers, eliminating Dalton McGuinty's regressive health tax, and helping our most vulnerable citizens, only John Tory has a vision and plan for a strong, inclusive and economically prosperous Ontario.
quote / posted 01 October 2007 7:09 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All I received this letter from a concerned Citizen who would like to encourage all people to read Linda Leatherdales Article of which I will post next Regards Bill C From: John Hoell To: torsun.editor@sunmedia.ca Sent: Saturday, September 29, 2007 10:32 PM Subject: Re-Retirees want their money In regards to Linda leatherdale's column Friday Sept.28-Retirees want their money,I urge all Ontarians to read and understand her story.I signed that petition 6 months ago after doing some serious investigating and was almost sick to my stomach.In my opinion this trash that calls themselves the liberal party of Ontario must be voted out of office on October 10 and preferably into jail where most of them belong.They are treating our seniors with complete disrespect and just plain arrogance.If every taxpayer knew the facts (as this situation of these controversial locked-in pensions could very well apply to them and endanger their financial well being when they retire) I am sure without doubt that they would vote these bums out come Oct.10.This is disgusting the way our seniors who worked hard during their lives to be treated this way.I personally have sent numerous emails to the liberals to explain themselves and what they intend to do to fix this mess but I did not receive one reply,which I figured anyways.I know one thing absolutely for sure and that is on Oct.10 my vote will not be for these incompetent liberals and I urge everyone to go out and exercise their right to vote. J.Hoell Barrie
quote / posted 02 October 2007 2:52 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi This is a Great article that Linda Leatherdale wrote. http://money.canoe.ca/Columnists/Leatherdale/2007/09/28/4533775-sun.html Any wise politician knows this: Don't tick off the blue-rinse crowd. Well, this powerful voter group is ticked off. Skyrocketing property taxes have them seeing red. So do gouging electricity bills that Queen's Park hit with a debt retirement tax, plus GST. And they're angry about a clampdown on their precious income trusts, thanks to the feds. But here's an issue that really has them riled. Not allowing them access to their locked-in pension money. Their anger hits meltdown when they recall how MPPs were allowed total access to their pension money in 1999, when some $54 million was withdrawn from the old pension scheme, then topped up with $55 million from general revenues, for a total of $109 million funnelled into MPP RRSP accounts. "It's disgusting how elected officials have this ongoing trend of continually taking care of themselves, while totally ignoring the rest of the electorate," writes Eva Cherwinski, one of thousands who've signed a petition demanding access to locked-in funds. Here's how Ontario's pension laws work. Let's say you're 48, and you get the boot out the corporate door. Any money accrued in your company pension plan would be moved into a Locked-In Retirement Account (LIRA), and you're not allowed to touch the money until you're 55. Problem is access is very limited, like only 6.7%. The older you get, the more money you can get at -- but not until age 90 can you take all your money. James Law accuses Queen's Park of being "cruel." He wrote that five years ago his mother was diagnosed with cancer and his father, then 68, had a sizable amount of money in a locked-in pension. His parents wanted to travel and enjoy the money while they could, but his father was denied access to the funds. His mother died two years later, and now his dad is gone, too. "We, his children, did not want their money," Law said. Recent changes to pension laws allow people facing financial hardships to get at the money. Also, you're allowed access if a doctor certifies you have less than two years to live. In the past, regulators voiced concern if people had access they could blow the money and become dependent on low-income government programs. Others worried benefits, like the GST credit and old age credits, could be jeopardized, plus investors would miss out on extra value in vested pensions. But Malcolm Hamilton, a pension expert with Mercer Consulting, says their worries are misguided. "Personally, I don't see (why) the protection is needed," he said, pointing out investors have access to their RRSP money and there is no evidence of irresponsibility. CONVERT OR CASH OUT RRSP funds grow tax free up to age 71, when you must either convert to a RRIF or an annuity, or cash out. Cash out early and you pay tax at your income tax rate. The bottom line is Saskatchewan already allows 100% access to those 55 or older, Manitoba is soon to do the same, Alberta allows 50% at age 50, and New Brunswick 25%. It's estimated one million Canadians have locked-in pension money, with 450,000 of them in Ontario. "Why begrudge Ontarians the same right?" asks Bill Gleberzon, director of government relations with Canada's Association for the 50 Plus (CARP). With only 12 days to the Oct. 10 Ontario election, the CARP, along with the Ontario Coalition of Independent Locked-In Fund Holders, is making this a political hot potato. This week, they went to Queen's Park to demand changes that would see those aged 55 be allowed to access 50% of locked-in funds, and at 65, 100%. CARP has Conservative leader John Tory's support. He promises 100% access. NDP leader Howard Hampton is also committed. In December 2006, NDP MPP Andrea Horwath tabled a private's members bill that would unlock funds. With the heat on, Fiberal leader Dalton McGuinty was forced to introduce legislation to take effect in January 2008, that would allow people to transfer their current locked-in fund into a new locked-in fund, and be able to access 25% of the money within 60 days. "Miss the 60 days, and you're out of luck," said CARP's Gleberzon. Wanna fight back? Go to www.petitiononline.com/WRC101/petition.html. As Patricia Reeves argues, "It's our money, not yours!"
quote / posted 03 October 2007 8:28 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All ; This is a letter Ken sent to a Liberal MPP. Good morning Mr. Kwinter, Like your Liberal colleagues, both past and present ... Mr. Michael Brown, Mr. Michael Bryant, Mr. Sean Conway, Ms Caroline DiCocco, Mr. Bruce Crozier, Mr. John Gerretsen, Mr. Dalton McGuinty, and the list goes on ... you clearly understood the incongruity of Bill 27. Your words from the Hansard for Thursday, December 9, 1999 are ... " I haven't quite come to terms as to why there is a special provision for MPPs. What is the intent? I don't understand that.......... Why are we now singling out MPPs, and not only MPPs but a very small number who could have access to this provision? In fact on that same day you went to great lengths to tell the Legislature that as a former Minister of Financial Institutions in 1986, you had introduced Bill 170, an Act to revise the Pension Benefits Act. You said concerning Bill 170 ... "I would caution the members on the opposite side and the minister and the people in the ministry to make sure they have a coherent, clear rationale for why this is being done, particularly when you take a look at Bill 170, the bill I introduced on December 9, 1986, where there was absolutely no mention of MPPs, no mention of any particular group other than pensioners. It was totally universal across the whole field of pensions." I have been asking you for some time ... are you a man of integrity . are you going to tell Ontarians the REAL and WHOLE truth behind Bill 27 . given that Mr. Bradley, Mr. Conway and 18 others from your Liberal party received totally unfettered, unlocked pensions ... pensions that had been previously locked-in ... and ... despite many members of your own party, including yourself, speaking strongly against such exclusive privilege . they accepted their unlocked pensions anyway. As you are well aware, this same extraordinary financial privilege has never been extended to any other Ontarian. Your recent offering of a one-time, 25% unlocking privilege of principal . full unlocking being available at age 90 ... is a cruel and vicious joke against Ontarians ... when compared to what Mr. Bradley and Mr. Conway received! Does the word HONOURABLE before your name compel you to tell ALL the truth ALL of the time ... or does it simply mean an enhanced pay cheque ... a pay cheque that is paid in part by seniors who own locked-in pensions and who must submit to the vulgar restrictions imposed on their pensions by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario.? Are you or are you not going to tell the WHOLE truth? You have been in power since 2003 and as such, have had ample opportunity to do so! I again await your answer, Kenneth Elliot
quote / posted 06 October 2007 9:01 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All; This part of the fight is just about over, the story will be told on Wednesday. If the Liberals get in We will have a hard fight to try and have these pensions unlocked 100% Anybody that wants these pensions unlocked had best get out and Vote for either the PC or NDP party because if not. Who Knows!! Here is a letter I sent out to some papers in NW Ontario recently and some of my thoughts below it Regards Bill Costello Unlock pensions Bill Costello Wednesday, October 3, 2007 Dear editor: An open letter to local Liberal candidate Mike Wood. Why is it, when asked the question to all members if they would unlock locked-in pensions at the all-candidates' debate on Kenora TV, that you immediately attacked Howard Hampton and his wife for having their pensions unlocked 100 percent when they retire at the age of 55 or their earlier retirement date. Why didn't you also state that 20 of your own party members also had their pensions unlocked—and many of them for a lot more money than Howard and his wife will receive when they retire. We don't begrudge the MPP's for having their pensions unlocked. This is the sensible thing to do. We do, however, begrudge the fact that even though the Liberal leader spoke out in the legislature against it being done for the 61 special MPP's (including himself), that it was not fair because it was not done for the rest of the citizens in Ontario. He now refuses to do it for the working people and seniors of Ontario. Why is it that the Liberal party now only offers to unlock these pensions 25 percent and the remainder at 90 years of age? An age when most of the people already will have died! Why is it that the Liberal party refuses to unlock 100 percent when the NDP and the Progressive Conservatives, plus C.A.R.P. (the organization for 50-plus) and experts in the field of pensions, such as Gordon Pape, Jack Mintz, and Malcolm Hamilton, all agree that these pensions should be unlocked 100 percent for the citizens of Ontario at their retirement age, as it was done for the citizens of Saskatchewan in 2002. Why is it the Liberal party refuses to do the right thing? Especially considering that it would not cost the taxpayer one cent and also would improve the economy. Why is it the Liberal party refuses, after being lobbied for two years, to do the honourable thing and unlock these pensions. (Signed), Bill Costello Atikokan, Ont. Editor's note: Bill Costello is with the Ontario Coalition of Independent Locked-in Fund Holders
quote / posted 08 October 2007 9:07 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Why will the Liberals not unlock our Personal Pensions -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi All This is a note to a question I was asked. ( Why wont the Liberals unlock our personal pensions? ) My Reply It Just doesn't make sense and I cant understand their thoughts because of these things. A person that has a LIRF can invest their money and lose it all . ( they have no problem with that ) They allow the pension to be unlocked fully and transferred in to a RRIF If the pension holder dies and it goes to the spouse. ( I have no problem unlocking for the spouse) The Part I cant understand is if they can do that for one. Why cant they do it for two ? ( to me this doesn't make seance as the Plan Holder more the likely has more knowledge of the workings of the funds. People like Jack & Malcolm & Gordon & CARP & Senior organizations endorse unlocking these pensions 100%. Financle institutions say it would be better for them. ( Less paper work ) It would be better for the economy of Ontario. Saskatchewan did it 5 years ago and Other provinces are following. The people have been Asking for this to be done. Greg Sorbara The Ontario Finance Minister Said "it is not to protect the people". Greg Sorbara said "it was to protect the contract with the Employer " ( This Contract is no longer a contract when the plan is moved to a LIRF or RRSP ( The employer is no longer involved ) Is it that McGuinty and Company want to have power over the people of this province. If there really a logical reason that they want to keep these pensions locked in. I cant under stand it. It would be sure nice if we could sit down face to face with the Liberals and let them logically explain why they refuse to unlock these pensions. Regard Bill C
quote / posted 08 October 2007 9:28 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	CARP's campaign to unlock locked-in funds in Ontario Article By: Bill Gleberzon, CARP co-director of Government Relations CARP campaigns to unlock locked-in funds 100 per cent for 450,000 Ontarians. The primary objective of CARP's campaign in conjunction with the Ontario Coalition of Independent Locked-In Fund Holders is to prompt the government elected on October 10th to unlock LIFs by 100% in Ontario as Saskatchewan did in 2002. Our proposal is to allow LIF holders to unlock 50% at age 55 and the balance (or total) at 65. Locked-In Funds are the best kept pension secret in Canada - and the most misunderstood. Therefore, the second purpose in our campaign is to make the estimated over 450,000 Ontario LIF-holders, the general public and the media aware of what a LIF is, how it works and the obstacles that currently await Ontario LIF-holders when they want to access their pension money. To achieve this objective a media conference was held at CARP's National Office on September 26, 2007. CARP's position was supported at the media conference by: - Canada's preeminent tax expert Professor Jack Mintz, Joseph L. Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto (“… I don't see why [unlocking LIFs] should be any less than 100 percent …from a public policy perspective.”) - Actuary Malcolm Hamilton, World Wide Partner Mercer (“… we can conclude with great confidence that these [locked-in] rules aren't doing anything constructive any more.”) - With a message from financial author and publisher Gordon Pape (“I wish to strongly support CARP's initiative to encourage the Government of Ontario to implement 100% unlocking of the assets held in LIRAs, LIFs and other types of locked-in plans.”) - Ontario Coalition of Independent Locked-In Fund Holders members Philip James and Bill Nafziger provided personal testimony on the adverse impact of not giving LIF-holder access to their own money - Bill Gleberzon, CARP's Director of Government Relations, presented CARP's case. Their speeches and supporting documentation, including a letter of endorsement from Ontario Society (Coalition) of Senior Citizens' Organizations and CARP's unofficial list of 61 MPPs who accessed their Locked-In Funds 100%, are available on the LIF web page at www.carp.ca. A precedent for unlocking LIFs 100% was set in Ontario in 1999 when 61 Ontario MPPs were enabled by legislation to unlock their Legislative pension by 100%. Some of these 61 MPP's are running in the current campaign, including Mr. McGuinty, Mr. Sorbara, Mr. James Bradley, Mr. Hampton and Mr. Runciman -- the later two have admitted publicly that they were among the recipients of this privilege. CARP does not begrudge these 61 MPP's the right to unlock their LIFs 100 per cent. But the Association does greatly begrudge them denying that right to all other Ontarians. As a non-partisan association, CARP focuses on issues, not parties or personalities. However, at this point in the current election campaign: - the Conservatives have promised to unlock them 100% - the NDP introduced a Private Members Bill in December, 2006 to unlock them 100% -- although the Party has not yet followed up by including that proposal in their platform - the Liberal's new policy to unlock LIFs by 25 per cent will take effect in January 2008. CARP's recommends that: - if the Conservatives win the election, they must live up to their commitment to unlock LIFs by 100 per cent soon after forming the government. - if the NDP are elected, we trust that they will implement the Private Members' Bill introduced last December within a short period of coming to power. - and, if the Liberals are re-elected, we urge them to do the democratic thing and unlock LIFs by 100 per cent. Or, at the very least, they should hold extensive public consultations across the province on their new policy of unlocking LIFs by 25 per cent to determine if that is what Ontarians want done—rather than establishing their new policy by paternalistic fiat. To sign a petition on unlocking Ontario LIFs 100 percent, go to: www.petitiononline.com/WRC101/petition.html
quote / posted 09 October 2007 9:08 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	DALTON MCGUINTY'S TIME ON AIR YESTERDAY I know it is too late to change peoples minds about the people we are voting for , To Me it just shows how much disrespect the Liberal Government has for the people of this Province. Below are a couple of letters sent out in disgust of what happened at a radio show that was to take call's to ask questions of the Premier. Good morning Eileen, Yesterday afternoon, Michael Coren admitted on air that Mr. McGuinty had not, as had earlier been promised to CFRB listeners, opened the phone lines to the Ontario electorate. Not only did we witness another brazen example of this man's contempt for Ontarians, but CFRB went on to support such deceit by announcing that there would be a repeat broadcast later in the evening. Your unwillingness to expose this man for what he is ... one who refuses to have open and honest dialogue with Ontarians ... a glaring example being his recent brush-off of the Ottawa cancer patient ... has left me wondering if there is even one member of the media (CFRB included) who values truth and moral decency any longer. Taylor Parnaby, during his news broadcast on Friday, October 05, 2007, was musing over the proliferation of "spin" . half-truths, quarter-truths and outright lies ... that is handed to Ontarians daily and how difficult it is, even for him, to get honest answers to direct questions. He went on to say that one person from one of the political parties who has been regularly sending him "spin", will no longer be welcome in his office, once the election is over. Why didn't CFRB immediately take Mr. McGuinty off the air when it realized there would be no open phone lines for listeners? After all, listeners were being encouraged by CFRB, right up to the last minute before the programme aired, to call in if they wanted to speak directly to the Premier. Just disgusted ... this blatant manipulation of Ontarians by our politicians has to stop ... otherwise our vote is nothing more than an exercise in futility. Kenneth Elliott To: eileen@cfrb.com Subject: The dalton love in hour What a disgusting piece of tripe I heard on CFRB yesterday. I could not believe what went on. Back slapping Buddies IE: Sorbara, Bradley, and the hand picking of the easy questions, ( and very few for that matter ), did it for for me. A real leader would not be afraid of the real questions, nor the real answers, but he just dodged every political issue that was important to your listeners. I speed dialed your show for the whole hour.This will have an effect on how much I listen to CFRB in the future. What a disgusting display of partisanship, back slapping hip hip Gee what a great guy I am Dalton Show. I could not believe a station like yours would allow such deceit , and the side stepping of the real important issues and questions in this election, that your listeners would have liked to put forth. A fed up listener. Philip James
quote / posted 10 October 2007 8:29 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All; Below is a article many of you may have seen in the paper. I just wanted to let you all know information I have received about the Commision Concerning the Study. Pension law to be revamped Posted 4 hours ago Finance Minister Greg Sorbara says Ontario's pension law is out of date and needs a facelift. He says the province is looking at revamping its pension law and has asked the Ontario Expert Commission on Pensions to hold hearings over the next few months. Sorbara says Ontario's pension law was a leader when it was enacted in 1986 but has lost pace with other regions. The commission will take written and oral submissions from pensioners, employees, plan administrators and other interested people. Hearings are set for Kingston, Ottawa, Sudbury, Toronto, Windsor and Hamilton. The study is the first review of pension law in 20 years. Information I have received. The last time we contacted the Ontario Expert Commission on Pensions, they told us that unlocking of pensions was not included in the study. Bill Gleberzon of CARP is submitting a large brief to try and change their minds and have them include unlocking pensions. Many Members of The Coalition of independent holders have sent in e-mail submissions. I encourage all people to still write their Premier and MPP's to unlock locked-in pensions. We have not given up on this issue. Regards Bill C
quote / posted 18 October 2007 8:01 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All; Here is some information on the Unlocking of your 25% in January. We Will still be going after the 100%. We are just letting the party's reorganize after the election. Keep encouraging people to sign the online petition ( I will be mailing it in again ) and also Please keep mailing the Premier and MPP's and our soon to be new Finance Minister. Take Care , Regards Bill C Changes To The Rules For Ontario Locked-In Accounts On July 27, 2007, O. Reg. 416/07 under the Pension Benefits Act was filed. The Regulation makes numerous important changes to the rules governing locked-in accounts. The following are answers to some of the questions that are likely to arise as a result of these changes. For ease of reference, the questions are grouped under the following headings: Overview of changes Q: What are the key changes to the locked-in account rules? A: The key changes are: A new Life Income Fund (the "New LIF") is introduced effective January 1, 2008. It will provide more flexible payments and allow owners a one-time opportunity to withdraw up to 25% of the amount in the New LIF. An option to directly transfer money from a locked-in account to an unlocked vehicle, a registered retirement savings plan ("RRSP") or a registered retirement income fund ("RRIF") is provided in certain situations. Effective January 1, 2008, owners of locked-in accounts who are non-residents of Canada, as determined by the Canada Revenue Agency ("CRA") for the purposes of the federal Income Tax Act, may apply two years after departure from Canada to withdraw the money in their accounts. The current Life Income Fund (the "Old LIF") and the Locked-In Retirement Income Fund ("LRIF") will not be available for purchase after December 31, 2008. Q: Which changes come into effect as of July 27, 2007? A: Owners of Old LIFs are no longer required to purchase an annuity by the end of the year in which they reach 80 years of age. Owners of Old LIFs will be able to continue their LIF after they reach 80 years of age. Owners of Locked-In Retirement Accounts ("LIRAs") can now keep the money in their LIRA until the end of the year in which they reach the age of 71 rather than the end of year in which they reach the age of 69. This reflects a change made to the federal Income Tax Act. Owners of Old LIFs and LRIFs can transfer the money in their accounts to a LIRA prior to the end of the year in which they reach the age of 71. Changes that affect the Old LIF Q: I currently own an Old LIF. Do I have to make any changes to it to comply with the new rules? A: There is no need to make any immediate changes to your LIF as a result of the new rules. However, since an annuity purchase is no longer required, you can continue your LIF past age 80 and you can transfer the money to a LIRA until the end of the year in which you reach age 71. Q: Can I still buy an annuity with money in my Old LIF? A: Yes, at any age. Q: Will there be any effect on the amount of the annual income payment from the Old LIF in 2007? A: No. The minimum and maximum amounts for the annual income payment for 2007 were established as of January 1, 2007 and will not change. Q: Will the new rules change the formula for determining the minimum and maximum amount of the annual income payment for the 2008 year? A: No. The minimum and maximum for 2008 will be calculated using the same formula as in 2007. Q: If I want to transfer money out of my Old LIF, to which vehicles can I make the transfer? A: You can transfer money in an Old LIF to a LIRA until the year in which you reach age 71, to another Old LIF or to an LRIF before December 31, 2008, or for the purchase of an annuity. After January 1, 2008, you will be able to transfer the money to a New LIF as soon as financial institutions make the New LIF available. Q: What are the differences between the Old LIF and the New LIF? A: The New LIF will have another option for determining the maximum annual income payments and you will have a time limited option to withdraw or transfer to an RRSP or RRIF 25% of the value of the funds transferred into a New LIF. Q: Can I withdraw or transfer 25% of the funds from my Old LIF? A: No. The 25% withdrawal or transfer option is only available under the New LIF. Q: What happens if I die while I still have my Old LIF? A: Your surviving spouse is entitled to the full amount in your Old LIF in an unlocked lump sum as of the date of death. If you do not have a surviving spouse on the date of your death, your named beneficiary, or if there is none, your estate, is entitled to receive the amount in your Old LIF. Effective January 1, 2008, your spouse will have the option of transferring the full amount to his or her own RRSP or RRIF where permitted by the federal Income Tax Act. Changes that affect the Locked-In Retirement Income Fund (LRIF) Q: I currently own an LRIF. Do I have to make any changes to it to comply with the new rules? What happens if I do nothing? A: There is no need to make any changes to your LRIF as a result of the new rules. Q: Will there be any effect on the amount of the annual income payment from the LRIF in 2007? A: No. The minimum and maximum amounts for the LRIF in 2007 were based on the amount earned by the LRIF in the previous fiscal year and will not change. Q: Will the new rules change the formula for determining the minimum and maximum amount of the annual income payment for 2008? A: The minimum and maximum for 2008 will be calculated using the same formula as in 2007. Q: If I want to transfer money out of my LRIF, to which vehicles can I make the transfer? A: You can transfer money in an LRIF to a LIRA until the end of the year in which you reach age 71, to an Old LIF or another LRIF before December 31, 2008, or for the purchase of an annuity. After January 1, 2008, you will be able to transfer the money to a New LIF as soon as financial institutions make the new LIF available. Q: What are the differences between the LRIF and the New LIF? A: You will be able to withdraw or transfer to an RRSP or RRIF 25% of the value of the funds transferred into a New LIF and one of the methods by which to determine the maximum annual income payment (the cumulative investment earnings since the inception of the LRIF) will be replaced by the maximum amount under the LIF formula. If you transfer from an LRIF to a New LIF, you will no longer be able to carry forward the unused portion of your LRIF. If you do not use up the unused portion of your annual income payment in a fiscal year before your LRIF becomes a New LIF, you will no longer be able to add the unused portion to the maximum amount you can withdraw in future years. Q: What happens if I die while I still have my LRIF? A: Your surviving spouse is entitled to the full amount in your LRIF in an unlocked lump sum as of the date of death. If you do not have a surviving spouse on the date of your death, your named beneficiary, or if there is none, your estate, is entitled to receive the amount in your LRIF. Effective January 1, 2008, your spouse will have the option of transferring the full amount to his or her own RRSP or RRIF where permitted by the federal Income Tax Act. The New LIF Q: When will the New LIF be available? A: The regulation allowing for the New LIF will come into effect on January 1, 2008. After that date, financial institutions will be able to make the New LIF available to consumers once they get approval for their New LIF contract from the Canada Revenue Agency. Q: Who will be able to purchase the New LIF? A: An owner of an Old LIF, an LRIF, a LIRA, or a member of a registered pension plan who has terminated employment and is entitled to an immediate pension, or the member's former spouse, may transfer their commuted value to a new LIF. Q: What are the significant features of the New LIF? A: First, you will be able to keep the New LIF past age 80. If you took the maximum income payment each year, your New LIF would be exhausted by age 90, but if there are assets remaining in the New LIF at age 90, you may continue to keep it and withdraw income from it in subsequent years. Second, the maximum annual income payment will be the greater of the amount you could be paid under the formula in the New LIF (which is the same as the formula in the Old LIF) or the amount of investment earnings of the New LIF in the previous year. Third, you will be able to withdraw or transfer to an RRSP or RRIF up to 25% of the amount transferred into the New LIF. Q: How will the 25% withdrawal work? A: Owners of a New LIF will have the one-time option of withdrawing or transferring to an RRSP or RRIF an amount up to 25% of the total market value of the assets transferred into the New LIF. The transfer to a New LIF may be from an Old LIF, an LRIF, a LIRA, or from a registered pension plan when an individual who is entitled to an immediate pension terminates employment and is entitled to a transfer of his or her commuted value. However, the 25% withdrawal will not apply when assets are transferred from one New LIF to another New LIF. Q: When will I be able to make a 25% withdrawal? How do I apply, and to whom? A: The owner of the New LIF will be able to apply to the financial institution that issued the New LIF within 60 days from the date the assets were transferred to the New LIF. Application must be made on a form that is issued by the Superintendent of Financial Services. The form will be available in January 2008. Q: What would happen if I failed to make the 25% withdrawal within 60 days? Is there another opportunity to make the 25% withdrawal? A: If you do not apply to make the 25% withdrawal within 60 days of a transfer of funds into a New LIF, there will not be another opportunity to take advantage of this provision
quote / posted 28 October 2007 9:06 AM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi All ; This is a letter I just recently sent to Government. We are still working towards unlocking LIF's 100% in Ontario Regards Bill C Dear Dalton and Members of Provincial Parliament ; Congratulations on achieving a second majority victory. I am writing you again to request that you take a serious look at the locked-in pension issue. There is no logical reason that these pensions should be kept locked in. The statement your past Finance Minister gave on the Unlocking issue was , Quote " I don't think that this has any thing to do with protecting senior citizens from investors whether unscrupulous or not. It's about simply honoring the agreement the trust relationship between the employer and the employee at the time those funds were put in. " I have talked with a few employers about the last statement about " honoring the agreement " . Their response to that was , the agreement to provide , was a negotiation between the employer and the employed to provide a Pension for retirement. They did not feel that this pension should be locked in at retirement. Many People were caught in this locked in Pension Scam . I was one of them! I also have received hundreds of letters ,as I am sure You have ,that there are many people that were misinformed about these locked in pensions. This is what happened to me. When I was asked to join this pension plan in the 70's I was told that the employer would contribute 4% of my wage to a pension fund if I contributed 4% ( It was voluntary , some people did not join) I was told I could contribute more if I wished as it would help to give me more money at retirement. I moved my contribution up to 10% thinking that this was a great way to save for retirement (( I was sure wrong on that thought ! )) I faithfully put money into the plan believing how good things would be when I reached Retirement . In the early 80's a financial planer from Standard Life ( The institution that looked after our fund ) told us about RRSP's and how they weren't locked in and how we would have complete control of them at retirement. I then spoke up and said that we had best get out of our locked in fund then and invest in RRSP's (( everybody in our group agreed on doing this )) The Planner then said " You don't have to make any change , If you quit before your normal retirement date . You will be able to transfer your funds into a RRSP " The one important thing he didn't tell us was that it would be a Locked-in RRSP. None of us therefore invested in a Unlocked RRSP. Years later in 1999 a fellow worker decided to retire at 60. He left his job and applied for his retirement funds . He then got the shocking news that he would be only able to basically withdraw $ 8000.00 for every $100000.00 that he had in his pension fund. (( His plan was still Locked-in )) Needless to say he had to go back to work. When we seen what happened we immediately went to the employer and told him we wanted out of the locked in plan. The Employer agreed saying that he also did not realize that the plan did not become unlocked at retirement. We then started up a RRSP plan and the employer still put in their share of the money and we put in ours. The only thing that changes was the plan was not Locked in. Changing the plan did not help many of us as some were already nearer retirement and I became disabled and was no longer able to do my Job. Thank God I had invested in a RRSP for my wife and we were able to withdraw her funds as needed for the last 8 years or I would have lost everything that I had worked so hard for . There are many people that I receive letters from that saved believing that they would be able to use these funds in their retirement as they wished. They were misinformed by the financial advisers and led to believe that they would have full access to their funds. (( It Should be noted !! This is their Own Money and they took the Risks in investment )) Will You Please tell me why your government will not unlock these funds for the seniors of Ontario!! As I am sure You know that Saskatchewan has unlocked these funds 100% in 2002 for their Retired Seniors. Manitoba has also unlocked 50% and is being asked to unlock the remaining 50%. Alberta unlocked 50% and Now British Columbia is going to follow Alberta by unlocking 50% in it's Province. Organizations such as Canada's Association For The 50 Plus , The Common Front For Retirement Security with 2 Million members across Canada , The Ontario Coalition of Senior Organizations , The Ontario Coalition of Independent Lif Holders. All back unlocking LIF's 100% at 55 years of age in Ontario. Prominent People such as Professor Jack Mintz , Actuary Malcolm Hamilton , Financial Writer Gordon Pape . All agree that Ontario should unlock LIF's 100% as Saskatchewan did for their Senior retiree's. Please tell me what logical reason why the Government of Ontario feels that they should only unlock 25% instead of the full 100% of the Citizens own Money. Bill Costello ,
quote / posted 01 December 2007 1:00 PM
chub111
Active Member Registered	Hi Folks: This is a Christmas Letter sent to Dalton. Maybe You would also like to send one and ask Dalton to think of the Seniors in the New Year instead of acting like Mister Scrooge. Merry Christmas And a Prosperous New Year Regards Bill Costello. Hon Dalton McGuinty dmcguinty.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org Premier Hon Dwight Duncan dduncan.mpp@liberal.ola.org Minister of Finance Hon Aileen Carroll carrollaileen@yahoo.ca Minister Responsible for Seniors Good morning Mr. McGuinty, Once again it is Christmas time and once again it is time to remind you of the plight of seniors who hold Locked-In pensions. The Legislative Hansard reveals that on December 15, 1999 you asked the following question of then Finance Minister Ernie Eves. "My question is for the Minister of Finance. Minister, with reference to Bill 27, we have discovered deep down inside a delightful Christmas gift that you intend to give to a select group of MPPs in this Legislature. I want to make it perfectly clear in this House today that I and my party will have none of it. Your special provision says that MPPs are going to have special access to their pension funds. You're going to give a right to MPPs that none of the other 11 million Ontarians are going to be able to enjoy. Your new bill will allow some of our MPPs to have instant access to their pension plan at age 55 when you're going to give no other Ontarian that said same right. Minister, how can you possibly justify this double standard?" Bill 27 to which you referred was called An Act To Amend The Pension Benefits Act And The MPPs Pension Act. It received Royal Assent on December 22, 1999. Despite you personally having voted against Bill 27, as did other members of your Liberal party, your words of December 15th 1999, ... "I and my party will have none of it" ... have proven to be totally false. In fact, just the opposite has turned out to be the REAL truth. There were members from your own Liberal party who received extraordinary financial gain with respect to their pensions, despite having voted against Bill 27. Further, the person who received the most financial gain was none other than your former Liberal colleague, Mr. Sean Conway. Mr. Conway's own words from the Legislative Hansard for December 13, 1999 were ... "Make no mistake about it: Some of us, with names like Conway, Harris, Eves, Sterling, Runciman, are very substantially advantaged by a portion of this bill, and it is wrong that we should be so advantaged. ........... What we have here today, I say to my friends, in one particular respect is another sweetheart deal for a few members of this Legislature named Harris, Eves, Conway, among others. I want to make it plain. No one benefits more from this change than I do. It's a wrong thing for me to support. I would go even further and say it's immoral." Today, Mr. Conway has unfettered access to over $1 million of pension money that had previously been designated as Locked-In pension money. Yet he said such exclusive privilege was both wrong and immoral. Now, let us fast forward to Christmas 2006. As reported in the CTV article below of December 21, 2006, you Mr. McGuinty, were initially opposed to the magnanimous pay raise that was being proposed for MPPs. However upon the final vote being taken, you ended up being a major recipient of this magnanimous pay raise. Once again, MPPs, including yourself, received extraordinary financial gain just before Christmas. Once again too, you have profited from gains achieved, in some measure, on the backs of seniors who hold Locked-In pensions. Where certain special MPPs in 1999 received unfettered access to their pension monies at age 55, monies that had been accrued entirely from within a defined benefit plan called the infamous MPPs gold-plated pension plan, you now have had the audacity to allow seniors unfettered access to only 25% of their pension money, with the full access being delayed until age 90. As you well know, most seniors will not be alive at age 90 and as such will forfeit much of their hard-earned pension monies to the government in the form of estate taxes. Yet your fellow Liberal colleagues such as Jim Bradley, Sean Conway, Elinor Caplan and Tony Ruprecht, and the list goes on, who also may not be alive at age 90, get 100% unfettered pension access at age 55 and thus are able to enjoy their pension monies while still living. It is these forfeited pension monies that are paying a portion of your magnanimous pay raise. Also, the CTV article below makes reference to the fact the MPPs no longer have a pension plan. Such information from MPPs is flat-out deception of the public through semantics. Each MPP does have a pension plan. It is called an RRSP plan to which they now have unfettered access. What each MPP no longer has though, is membership in the former MPPs gold-plated defined benefit pension plan. Under relentless pressure from the public because of the inordinate pension benefits that politicians had bestowed upon themselves over the years, this plan was dissolved in 1995. The 10 per-cent of earnings that is now being contributed to each MPP's RRSP plan is in part coming from seniors who own Locked-In pensions. These are the same people Mr. McGuinty, to whom you refuse to extend unfettered pension access privileges. Mr. McGuinty, as you attend the Christmas recital at the school where your wife teaches, look around the room and see the number of grandparents that are there proudly supporting their grandchildren's efforts. Some of these grandparents own Locked-In pensions and as such are unable to enjoy the quality of life during their golden years that they deserve. Why? The answer is quite simple. You are denying them unfettered access to their own hard-earned pension monies while they are living. Yet at the same time you demand that they pay for your magnanimous pay raises and your rich pension buyouts of 1999. Your recent announcement of a national holiday in February is nothing but another example of a cruel shell game perpetrated in part against seniors. Everything costs, including your new holiday announcement and for sure it will be seniors with Locked-In pensions who will once again be asked to dig a little deeper. Why is a lock on one's financial assets, especially seniors, only acceptable for ordinary Ontarians but not acceptable for you Mr. McGuinty? As we await your Christmas message and hope upon hope that you don't find another way to award yourself another delightful Christmas gift, will you answer your own question as it relates to Locked-In pensions ... that is the question you asked of Mr. Eves back in 1999 that is still waiting for an honest answer today? "How can you possibly justify this double standard? I, along with hundreds of thousands of other seniors, await your answer. Kenneth Elliott
quote / posted 09 December 2007 7:55 AM

: <--back : Showing posts 61 to 80 : Next 7--> :
OR jump to page: 1 2 3 4 5

RECENT CLASSIFIEDS 80cc Bicycle engine Kits : : ColdFusion (CFMX) by Adobe Experts :

with active, local and relevent Thunder Bay classified ads

Featured Classifieds (more)

NEWEST FEATURED AD:
Would you like to Earn Extra Income Helping People Get Well?

Christmas Shopping Done in One Place

CR2032 and CR2025 Japan Maxell Lithium Battery

ColdFusion (CFMX) by Adobe Experts

What does active and local mean?
Change City / Change Country
Thunder Bay Home Page

Have questions? Fill in a form and we'll email or phone you back!

Add a classified
Add a business/club/organization
Add a forum topic


	PeopleField.org is a free service! Click to join and post your services and used goods today! top :: contact links :: built with Lopedia Portal :: Terms of Service :: Scam Prevention :: copyright 2001 - 2008 home / Thunder Bay :: LOG IN :: Change City / Change Country

Thunder Bay Ontario Classifieds / Canadian Classified Ads / PeopleField.org