Mulcair on pensions


Thomas Mulcair pitches pension reform, including a pension exchange.

The proposed pension exchange would be operated by CPP and consist of a payroll deduction system, a selection of investment funds including a public plan offered by the CPP Investment Board and regulatory requirements to both guarantee and insure benefits.

“Canadians who choose to participate will be able have their pension contributions deducted directly from their pay cheque and invested through the exchange in one of several investment funds including a public plan offered by the CPP Investment Board. This will force large financial institutions to complete for our investment dollars and guarantee both lower management fees and higher rates of return.”


Mulcair on pensions

  1. Does any financial institute sell a product similar to a defined benefit pension that an individual could buy?
    I.e. Contribute $X each month for 30 years and then receive a payment of $Y each month.

    • Insurance companies  – Manulife, Great West life, Sun Life, etc. have offered annuities for years.   Right now they are struggling with the low interest rate evironment we are stuck in and have cut back on their offerings.

    Oh for gawd’s sake, there is no such thing as “guaranteed higher rates of return”. 

    Stupid, stupid NDP!!!  Insured????  AAAAhhh!!!

    • Perhaps he means “guaranteed higher rates of return than if there wasn’t any competition on the fees”?

  3. Oh good.  Taking away the defined benefit part, we Liberals are voting on something similar this weekend, and I have a question.

    Who is this plan supposed to work for?  I get that we are woefully under-invested in our own retirement.  But if we don’t have room in our RRSPs (and we work to have any money to invest in the first place) wouldn’t that mean we are less woefully under-invested than the average Canadian?  The only scenario I can see is where one spouse works and the other doesn’t and the working spouse makes a good living such that he/she has enough cash lying around to invest more than the maximum per year.  And since room is based on annual working income (18% isn’t it?) wouldn’t it be a lot simpler just to invent a rule that states a person can give to his/her own RRSP 18% up to the maximum, and if his/her spouse isn’t working, an additional 18% up to the maximum for a spousal plan?

    Can anyone think of any other situation where this would have value?

    I’m going to vote yes to our pension resolution (at the moment) because I see hope in employers choosing to contribute as well, in some cases, when they didn’t offer a pension before.  Because they can offer $1 for every $4 or $10 or whatever they want.

Sign in to comment.