Fixing MP Pensions: Parliamentarians Must Lead Canada's Move to Fairer, and Better-Funded Retirements
AbstractThe pension plans of federal government employees are relatively generous and badly underfunded, with the Pension Plan for Members of Parliament (MPs), which covers members of the House of Commons and the Senate, standing out on both counts. The MP plan promises much higher retirement incomes than most Canadians can dream of: the implied accumulation of wealth in these plans amounts to more than 50 percent of pay – with today’s very low yields on sovereign-grade securities, arguably closer to 70 percent. In addition, the plan has set aside essentially no assets to pay future benefits: a realistic appraisal of its financial condition would show, not the ‘actuarial excess’ of $176 million that appears in the latest actuarial report on the plans, but a deficit as large as $1 billion. This plan subjects taxpayers to financial risks few appreciate, and undermines the federal government’s authority to lead Canada’s search for a better retirement income system.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by C.D. Howe Institute in its journal C.D. Howe Institute Backgrounder.
Volume (Year): (2012)
Issue (Month): 146 (January)
Pension Papers; Canada; pension reform; Pension Plan for Members of Parliament (MPs); federal employee pension plan;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- H5 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies
- H55 - Public Economics - - National Government Expenditures and Related Policies - - - Social Security and Public Pensions
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- James Pierlot & Faisal Siddiqi, 2011. "Legal for Life: Why Canadians Need a Lifetime Retirement Saving Limit," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 336, October.
- Alexandre Laurin & William B.P. Robson, 2012. "Achieving Balance, Spurring Growth: A Shadow Federal Budget for 2012," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 344, March.
- Adam Aptowitzer & Benjamin Dachis, 2012. "At the Crossroads: New Ideas for Charity Finance in Canada," C.D. Howe Institute Commentary, C.D. Howe Institute, issue 343, March.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Kristine Gray).
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.